[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: merge status

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Jody McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 02:18:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > If you have a 71kB patch, it definitely counts as new stuff and not just
> > trivial bugfixes.
> Fair enough.
> Can I still send a 2k spinlock fix in ~2 weeks? That's the only thing I
> really want to get in to 2.6.15.

Sure, there's nothing wrong with keeping "ongoing development" around, and
then just asking me to pull the unrelated fixes.

Either using separate patches to synchronize the bugfixes, or just using
separate git branches for development and merging up to me. As usual, Jeff
ends up the poster-boy for git branches (these days there are certainly
others that do it too, but Jeff has done it more and for longer than

For example, going to Jeff's networking tree:;a=summary

you can see

15 hours ago ALL shortlog | log
15 hours ago e100-sbit shortlog | log
16 hours ago upstream-linus shortlog | log
16 hours ago upstream shortlog | log
20 hours ago master shortlog | log
4 days ago sky2 shortlog | log
4 days ago sis900-wol shortlog | log
4 days ago 8139-thread shortlog | log

where "upstream-linus" is the part I merged today, while he has possibly
other development work in the other branches.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.035 / U:2.088 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site