![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:01 am, Andrew Morton wrote: > > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com> wrote: > > > it's my contributors who drop me in it > > > by leaving their patch sets until you declare a kernel, dumping the > > > integration testing on me in whatever time window is left. > > > > Yes, I think I'm noticing an uptick in patches as soon as a kernel is > > released. > > > > It's a bit irritating, and is unexpected (here, at least). I guess people > > like to hold onto their work for as long as possible so when they release > > it, it's in the best possible shape. > > I suspect part of that is the concern about whether the code will merge with > whatever -mm looks like next. Of course you already do ludicrous amounts of > merging, but sometimes you'll just throw it back and say "too many rejects". Well of course that's not a concern for people who work against the git trees - scsi/usb/ia64/whatever developers. But yes, sometimes people's work does clash just too much with things which are already in subsystem trees or in -mm. Fortunately it's relatively rare, and I do think it's best to ask people to develop against latest -linus rather than against a crazy -mmoving target. Especially as lots of people are stuck using git, rather than high-tech patch management technologies ;) Actually, I disagree with you - it's at 2.6.x release-time that all trees, including -mm are at their most divergent. Presumably these developers are working against the relevant subsystem git tree, and hence can merge into the subsystem maintainer at any time. - 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: 2005-11-10 01:27 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||