On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 06:42:41PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 15:17 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 05:06:26PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> >
> > > Sure, I get that, but I was already out on PTO on the 30th.  What
> > > sucks
> > > is that it landed right after I was out.  But I plan to have the
> > > pull
> > > request in before EOB today, so the difference between the 20th and
> > > today is neglible.  Especially since lots of people doing QA
> > > testing
> > > prefer to take -rc tags, in that case, the difference is non-
> > > existent.
> >
> > My thinking was that people should test -rc,
>
> Great, with you here...
>
> >  but if they have problems
> > they could grab your for-rc branch and check if their issue is
> > already
> > fixed..
>
> They can do this too...
>
> But if that still doesn't resolve their problem, a quick check of the
> mailing list contents isn't out of the question either.  In that case,
> they would have found the solution to their problem.  But, when you get
> right down to it, only one person reported it in addition to the
> original poster, so either other people saw the original post and
> compensated in their own testing, or (the more likely I think), most
> people don't start testing -rcs until after -rc2.

I don't know about other people, but our testing of -rc starts on -rc1
and we are not waiting for -rc2. From my observe of netdev, they also
start to test -rc immediately.

Otherwise, what is the point of the week between -rc1 and -rc2?

> Which is why I try to set -rc2 as a milestone for several purposes.
> For getting in the bulk of the known fixes, but also as a branching
> point for for-next.
>
> --
> Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>     GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
>     Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B  1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
>