Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:44:15 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:05:39 -0400
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:52:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > I think the even/odd idea is great, personally. And if this > > makes some people have to wait a little bit longer for their > > favorite feature to get merged, that's tough. :-) > > My concern is that people will 'sit out' the even stage, and > just accumulate stuff in a single tree they dump once when > every odd release opens up.
At least they would be dumping on top of "mostly working". I kind of like that. It breeds more confidence into the tree having been working before the dump took place, thus making the isolation of cause much easier.
> We already have some subsystems that do once-per-release merges, > and then let fixes build up in their out-of-tree SCM for months > until the next window. It won't necessarily get worse, but unless > everyone is participating in the odd/even rules, we won't get > the benefits that it would offer.
Having odd/even rules kind of adds legitimacy to the per-tree folks doing the same. This avoids situations like "why is XXX being an asshole with his tree, when there are other trees merging new features this round?". Having buy-in from everyone is very useful and gets folks in the correct mindset. - 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/
| |