Skip to content

Conversation

@MorrisJobke
Copy link
Member

Just got aware of this again after a discussion with @kesselb in #16288 (comment)

Signed-off-by: Morris Jobke <hey@morrisjobke.de>
@skjnldsv
Copy link
Member

skjnldsv commented Jul 8, 2019

I find it is confusing that we had previous repair steps but we cannot find them afterwise. Won't that be harder to narrow if something goes wrong?

@MorrisJobke
Copy link
Member Author

I find it is confusing that we had previous repair steps but we cannot find them afterwise. Won't that be harder to narrow if something goes wrong?

Why should we. They cleaned up the broken behavior already and then it's basically dead code. We also don't keep buggy code just because it caused some state that we have now. Or did I miss something here or got you completely wrong? And in case: it's all within git. So it's not really gone.

@skjnldsv
Copy link
Member

skjnldsv commented Jul 8, 2019

Well, yes it make sense :)

@juliusknorr juliusknorr added 4. to release Ready to be released and/or waiting for tests to finish and removed 3. to review Waiting for reviews labels Jul 8, 2019
@rullzer rullzer merged commit 3d69f03 into master Jul 8, 2019
@rullzer rullzer deleted the techdebt/noid/cleanup-outdated-repair-steps branch July 8, 2019 18:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

4. to release Ready to be released and/or waiting for tests to finish technical debt

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants