<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [GTK] maps.google.com unresponsive/stalls in 2.11.3"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153194#c6">Comment # 6</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [GTK] maps.google.com unresponsive/stalls in 2.11.3"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153194">bug 153194</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:agomez@igalia.com" title="Andres Gomez Garcia <agomez@igalia.com>"> <span class="fn">Andres Gomez Garcia</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=153194#c5">comment #5</a>)
...
<span class="quote">> I don't think it's a matter of number of commits, we had a lot of commits in
> this release because it took a bit more time since the laste release. All
> commits landed are bug fixes, rendering issues, crashes and security bugs.
> What should I leave out? I always try to avoid major refactorings, or large
> changes in JSC. For every commit I merge, if it's JSC I run all the
> javascript tests, if it's a rendering issue or crash referencing layout
> tests I run those, and if it affects the GTK API I run the GTK API tests. I
> could still merge a commit that breaks something or regresses, of course,
> but that wouldn't change if I merged fewer commits.</span >
I agree it is not the number of commits but maybe the criteria could be slightly changed.
What about only merging:
* fixes of bugs reported to the stable branch.
* security fixes
* other kind of fixes that have been already merged in (current_unstable_version - 1) and no regressions have been reported on them.
WDYT?</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>