Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin | Date | Wed, 30 Jan 2002 02:41:11 +0100 |
| |
On January 30, 2002 02:18 am, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 12:00:11PM +1100, Stuart Young wrote: > > Perhaps it's time we set up a specific lkml-patch mailing list, and leave > > I like the suggestion (most recently, of Daniel? pardon if I > miscredit) of having patches-2.[45]@vger.kernel.org type addresses, > which would archive patches, and have a high noise-to-signal ratio. > Maybe even filter out all non-patches. > > The big issue I cannot decide upon is whether standard e-mails should be > To: torvalds@ > CC: patches-2.4@ > or just > To: patches-2.4@ > > (I'm guessing Linus would prefer the first, but who knows)
I'd say: cc Linus specifically if you think it's something he'd find personally interesting. Leave out the cc if it's a minor bugfix or maintainance.
Oh, as somebody suggested in this thread, there is a difference in priority between bugfixes and other kinds of patches. Should buxfixes go to patches-xxx@kernel.org with [BUGFIX] in the subject, or would bugs-xxx@kernel.org be a better idea?
> Also, something noone has mentioned is out-of-band patches. Security fixes > and other patches which for various reasons go straight to Linus.
Out-of-band patches are not going to stop. The difference is, they will be duly noticed after the fact because they should be relatively few in comparison to in-band patches.
Another kind of out-of-band patch is where Linus takes the basic idea from somebody's patch and completely rewrites it, or does some hacking on his own, which he's been known to do. Somehow I wouldn't expect he'd bother emailing the results to himself.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |