Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Reducing the pressure | From | Francois-Rene Rideau <> | Date | 01 Oct 1998 02:13:55 +0200 |
| |
esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
> Patches get lost. Patches get dropped. Patches get missed. This is > bad and wasteful in itself, but it has a secondary effect that is > worse -- it degrades the feedback loop that makes the whole process > work. What about a patch robot, much like the LSM Robot, that forces submitters into a minimum of discipline, and helps Linus manage patches?
It could also be used to offer both Linus and submitters a nice interface as to patch status. Submitters could also replace patches with newer ones, etc. Integration into Linus' environment (aka easy apply/unapply) would be good, too.
All in all, it looks like a lot of the work needs to be done in tight collaboration with Linus.
NB: once the basic infrastructure is setup, there are lots of possibilities for extension:
assuming the bot is well interfaced to the web, and has a mirror/whatever running on a server near Linus with lots of CPU available, it could be complemented with nice source analysis and/or invalidation mechanisms, as to what patched or unpatched parts of the kernel are likely to be outdated by what change in the kernel design.
There could also be a version of the bot just for handling source layout and/or fixes in comments/typos...
The bot could be moderated (or not), with some official maintainer doing grunt work, and semi-automatically filtering things to keep abusers out.
## Faré | VN: Уng-Vû Bân | Join the TUNES project! http://www.tunes.org/ ## ## FR: François-René Rideau | TUNES is a Useful, Not Expedient System ## ## Reflection&Cybernethics | Project for a Free Reflective Computing System ## An apple every eight hours will keep three doctors away.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |