Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU build broken

[Markus Armbruster]

Brad Smith <address@hidden> writes:

> On 10/05/14 3:07 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 10/05/2014 08:45, Brad Smith ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>> Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right.  You earn it by
>>>> helping to maintain it.  "it's not really maintained right now" means it
>>>> has not been earning its keep.  You're encouraged to remedy that.
>>>
>>> Huh? "my feature"? I have nothing to do with this. What kind of crazy
>>> is this? How to misdirect and not take responsibility for breaking
>>> something. If there wasn't sloppy irresponsible development in the
>>> first place it wouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> Brad,
>>
>> all this is doing, is convincing people that bsd-user is not worth
>> keeping in the tree.  It's a fact that in a million-line codebase not
>> all patches can be tested by all people.
>
> My posts have nothing to do with bsd-user. I don't give a shit about it.
> The real issue is the process and the fact that someone removed a
> constant from the configure script and didn't even grep the tree to
> see
> if it existed anywhere else. That is very sloppy.
>
>> Why don't you send a patch instead of whining?
>
> Constantly trying to deflect from the real issues.

No, this *is* the real issue: process gets improved by *people*.  People
like *you*.  Pointing out flaws in the process is only marginally
helpful, as we're painfully aware of them already.  Actually doing
something about it is what counts, because that's where we're short.

As Peter said, code people can't easily build build locally *will* get
broken once in a while, and the solution for that are build bots
shooting down pull requests that don't compile, or fail automated tests.
You're very much invited to help with providing such services.