On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Pedro Lino <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Andrea, all
>
> > Remember that the amount of code changes needed to produce something
> > named 4.1.5 is quite significant and very much error-prone. Take a
> look
> > at the relevant issues in case, but for a "quick fix" I would
> definitely
> > stick to 4.1.4, produce 4.1.4-RC5 and vote on RC5, while undoing
> what we
> > did for 4.1.4-RC4.
> >
>
> +1
>
> > I have
> > still to understand the importance of this bug too - I assume this
> > affects potentially many users, otherwise we can go the slippery way
> of
> > "fix just another small bug" for ages.
> >
>
>
> This is not a fix for a small bug. It is a regression introduced since
> 4.1.3
>
> I believe all regressions from 4.1.3 should be fixed before release. After
> all 4.1.4 is a bug fix release, so regressions are not expected (or
> acceptable IMO)
>
>
> Pedro
>
I agree with Pedro's assessment of regressions.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Only the truth will save you now."
-- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
