lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: ioctls, etc. (was Re: [PATCH 1/4] sas: add flag for locally attachedPHYs)
David Lang wrote:
> Stefan,
> we are supposed to be on a 2-month release cycle, with all major
> changes going in in the first two weeks of that cycle. This timeframe
> doesn't leave you any noticable time to implement your steps seperatly
> (and zero testing between them). as a result, in practice your proposal
> amounts to a big-bang approach, and/or results in releases that are
> known-broken.

Experimental branches of subsystems usually cannot (nor need to) be
bound to a release cycle.

> and while you suggest putting this in -mm, remember that the -mm kernel
> needs to be useable so that people can test it, and it is on the same
> schedule as the main kernel so again you can't have known-broken things
> (of this scale) there either.

I assumed there would be a few unmaintained bits (of marginal "scale")
left which could not be updated, but it seems now that won't be the
case.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=-= =-=- ==--=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-25 01:13    [W:0.234 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site