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:0.023 / U:121.840 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site