Open Stack

On 01/12/2016 09:32 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12 2016, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> 
>> My question to the ML is this, should stylistic changes of this kind be handled
>> in a consistent way across all projects, maybe with a hacking rule and some
>> discussion on the ML first? After all, if this change is worthwhile, it is
>> worth ensuring that this construct that we are seeking to eliminate, does not
>> reenter the code base.
> 
> This is not stylistic, these are actual changes that can break the code
> for no good reason. I've already -2'ed the Ceilometer one.
> 
> Honestly, this kind of change are getting more and more a problem to us.
> People invent a false bug, maybe report it to LP and mass-assign
> projects, and then spam all the projects without any discussion before.
> The worse thing is that most of these patches are wrong or incorrect,
> add code-churn that just pollutes project history for no benefit.
> 

For anyone interested here, this is the most recent example of this that
I've seen (and not the first time this same faulty change has been
discussed in Cinder):

https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1512207

The change suggested here makes unit tests weaker, but many projects
have already landed this change.

I'd just like to be another voice to say: these changes are often not as
simple as they look, and really need careful review.