[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:21:33 -0800 Greg KH <> wrote:
> Note that a lot of these are already in the MAINTAINERS file.
> But for the record, here's mine, in the order they need to be pulled
> from.
> Driver core:
> PCI:
> USB:
> These are all quilt trees, with the series file in the directory for the
> order of the patches, and a README saying what kernel version they have
> been rebased against.

Thank you. Over time we might think about some sort of standard for

> Oh oh oh, I get merged first! me me me!

What's it worth to you? :-)

> This is going to get really interesting, especially when (not if) we do
> more global api changes. Look at the last round of kobject changes.
> That touched a lot of different places, and other trees ended up not
> building because of it, because I changed apis and they had added new
> code based on the old apis.

This is one of the things that linux-next will hopefully let us discover
more easily/faster.

> I think the only way to fix this is not going to just "drop the tree"
> like you are suggesting, but to let both people know (the person who
> caused the change, and the person who's tree broke after the merge), and
> then either add a "fixup patch" for the build like Andrew has been
> doing, or disabling something from the build section.

Right. Except that "drop the tree" will probably only mean for a day or
so i.e. it will be taken out of the current round but will reappear
automatically when the conflict/dependency is sorted out.

> As I know I'm going to be changing more driver core apis[1] this week,
> I'm sure we will get a very good set of examples of this for you to see
> in action :)


However, I am hoping that these global api changes may be introduced in a
more orderly fashion (some of which is happening already) by creating new
api's and then switching to them (and them maybe changing the names back
if necessary). And, yes, I realise that this is sometimes not possible
(or at least not worth the extra effort).

> Good luck,

Thanks, I will probably need it :-(

Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-12 06:09    [W:0.288 / U:1.192 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site