From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#27264: gnome-shell-3.24.2 consistently dies during initialization Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 15:16:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87zidevf5b.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o9u13e4i.fsf@netris.org> <8760g8t769.fsf@gnu.org> <87shjbwjdc.fsf@netris.org> <87ink6zo19.fsf@gnu.org> <87vao6poh7.fsf@netris.org> <87lgp2p5pv.fsf@gnu.org> <874lvm52bn.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42401) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dK2jq-0001gg-9W for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:17:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dK2jm-0003P4-82 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:17:06 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:37200) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dK2jm-0003P0-3l for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:17:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dK2jl-00074c-Uv for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:17:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <874lvm52bn.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Sun, 11 Jun 2017 04:57:32 -0400") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: 27264@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Mark, Mark H Weaver skribis: > I'm not sure why you think "we are all guilty". Is it because we have a > collective responsibility to merge 'staging' more quickly than would be > possible if we waited for someone to test it first? If so, I disagree. Yes, I wrote =E2=80=9Cwe are all guilty=E2=80=9D because I think we are col= lectively responsible. Those who worked on it did their best to track and fix problems on the branch before merging and simply overlooked this problem; IOW, there was some testing, just not this particular test, which, in hindsight, is a mistake. > On the contrary, I believe we have a responsibility to make sure major > upgrade branches are tested before they are merged, because a broken > 'master' effectively means that we cannot deploy security updates to > users until the problem is fixed. I agree. But again, the branch was tested. Remember that gnome-shell is just one of the many things this branch touched; many other things lower in stack were upgraded. IOW, let=E2=80=99s not be too harsh to ourselves. We made an embarrassing mistake; we fixed it in a couple of days, and the lesson we learned is that we must test a full GNOME desktop the next time we upgrade things in this area. Ludo=E2=80=99.