Attention is currently required from: Arthur Heymans, Nico Huber, Jonathan Zhang, Johnny Lin, Stefan Reinauer, Christian Walter, David Hendricks, Deomid "rojer" Ryabkov, Tim Chu.
1 comment:
Patchset:
While aggravating, a -2 is not a personal attack, and in this case I am pretty sure that it was an attempt to spark a conversation.
Indeed, and this is the crux of the matter. Nico's reaction when he saw something broken was to revert, which is understandable, while mine was to fix the code so it works as intended (which obviously did not include breaking other things). In this situation one of the possible fixes was literally 1 line of code (2 if you count the comment) in CB:57581. Other fixes proposed were a few lines longer. Simple enough, right?
My rationale for wanting to push those changes instead was because they're so tiny and got both chipsets working again so we could all move on to solve other problems. To me that seems a lot simpler, faster, and easier to follow in the git log than reverting CB:54965 with this patch, fixing the bad assumption introduced in CB:55651 using CB:57633, and then reverting the revert (this patch) to add Emittsburg back in. We could have had everything working within a day taking timezone differences into account.
And as per the gerrit guidelines, when giving the -2 I provided a concrete recommendation for how to fix things. My recommendation actually solved the problem for both sides. I didn't just throw a tantrum and spew unhelpful and condescending remarks at the other side. Reviewing a <5 line patch that actually fixes things would have taken far less time, too.
And when Edward stepped in to clarify that "we should revert and re-land with it fixed correctly" I took my -2 off. Perhaps that should be in the flashrom development guidelines to automatically resolve these sorts of questions: https://www.flashrom.org/Development_Guidelines
To view, visit change 57589. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.