[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFD: Kernel release numbering

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> The only problem I see with this -- and its a minor problem -- is that
> some patches that belong in the 2.6.X.Y tree go straight to you/Andrew,
> rather than to $sucker.

Yes. I think people will have to be taught, and get used to the new world
order, and that could take a long time. And don't get me wrong, I include
myself in those people, ie it's not just that everybody else needs to
learn to Cc: the new group (I assume it's best to have a mailing alias, to
allow the thing to have multiple people involved even before it gets to
the vetting stage, and then have a _separate_ mail alias for the "vettign
group" people).

Think of how the -mm tree has evolved - with me and Andrew learning how
the other side acts and works. This would be the same thing, except
hopefully on a smaller scale (ie the _volume_ of patches had better be an
order of magnited smaller not just in size but in number too). It wasn't
just "let's set up Andrew". It was a learning experience.

And yes, we'll probably get duplicated changes, _especially_ early on. But
at least nobody seems to hate this idea, so I think we should drop the
original even/odd suggestion for now, and see if this would make more

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:1.009 / U:0.840 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site