From: "Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, liming.gao@intel.com
Cc: "Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>,
"Cetola, Stephano" <stephano.cetola@intel.com>,
Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>,
Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2] Soft Feature Freeze starts today for edk2-stable201905
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 15:04:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2dc9afe8-3f0f-fe87-cb8f-13aa18f9426b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E44FA00@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On 05/22/19 14:09, Liming Gao wrote:
> Here, I don't want to argue whether they are feature or bug. I just
> want to share my thinking, and collect feedback, then work out the
> clear rule so that all developers can follow.
Good question. Assume we push a series that adds a feature, but then we
realize it was not complete. Do we consider the rest of the work feature
enablement, or bugfix for an earlier (already existing) feature?
Maybe it helps if we try to determine the scope of the feature
precisely, up-front, in the BZ. If a patch falls under that scope (and
under nothing else, e.g. it is not a standalone fix for another bug in
its own right), then we could consider it "feature addition /
enablement".
In that regard, the ShellPkg & EmulatorPkg patches would be feature
enablement, not bug fixes.
But I'm worried that this approach would only push the problem to a
different location, namely, to determining the scope as precisely as
possible in the TianoCore BZ. Sometimes we don't know that a module or
package is affected in the scope, until we try something in practice.
Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-22 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-17 8:56 [edk2] Soft Feature Freeze starts today for edk2-stable201905 Liming Gao
2019-05-21 21:01 ` [edk2-devel] " Laszlo Ersek
2019-05-21 21:05 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-05-22 8:28 ` Ni, Ray
2019-05-22 8:53 ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-05-22 12:09 ` Liming Gao
2019-05-22 13:04 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2019-05-23 5:58 ` Liming Gao
2019-05-23 11:44 ` Laszlo Ersek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2dc9afe8-3f0f-fe87-cb8f-13aa18f9426b@redhat.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox