Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:46:52 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
| |
On Thu, 1 May 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > linux-next is _supposed_ to be solely the stuff that is ready to be sent to > you upon window-open.
Yes, the "stuff" may be supposed to be stable. But the trees feeding it certainly are not. People are rebasing them etc, and it doesn't matter because I think linux-next starts largely from scratch next time around.
> So, I think a 'next' branch from you would open cans o worms: > > - one more tree to test, and judging from linux-next and -mm it's tough to get > developers to test more than just upstream > > - is the value of holy penguin pee great enough to overcome this > another-tree-to-test obstacle? > > - opens all the debates about running parallel branches, such as, would it be > better to /branch/ for 2.6.X-rc, and then keep going full steam on the trunk?
I do agree. And maybe I should have made it clear that I think it's worth it to me only if it then means that the merge window can shrink.
If I'd have both a 'next' branch _and_ a full 2-week merge window, there's no upside.
Btw, it wouldn't be another tree to test, since it would presumaby be what 'linux-next' starts out from - so it would purely be something that doesn't have the constant re-merging of the more wild-and-crazy 'linux-next' tree.
Linus
| |