[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:0.021 / U:7.536 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site