lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT]: Networking


On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, David Miller wrote:
>
> That change was made under the pretext that it was tested heavily and
> that if we hit any problem whatsoever with it that we couldn't fix
> quickly it would be reverted.

David, I will say this one more time:

- as long as you concentrate on individual commits, you're missing the
big picture.

you can _always_ make excuses for individual commits. That's not my point.
Or rather, it actually verry much _is_ my point. If you have the mindset
that you're looking for excuses why any individual commit is ok to merge,
then you don't end up with a coupld of individual commits any more: you
end up with a LOT OF CHURN.

It's not the individual commits. You're looking at the individual trees,
and you're missing the forest. The problem isn't the individual trees. The
problem is that there's a metric sh*tload of individual trees, what we in
the tree industry call a 'forest'. You're not seeing it.

And btw, don't get me wrong - you're not the only problem spot. During the
-rc's leading up to 2.6.26, drivers/merdia was actually a _bigger_
problem. I happen to care less about that (the same way I care less about
some odd-ball architectures), but I have to admit that drivers/media was a
total disaster last time around.

So if it makes you feel any better, others have been even worse. But this
networking problem ha been going on for quite a while.

So the problem here really is that you seem overly eager to make excuses
for individual patches. And if they _stayed_ "individual" it would all be
good. But they don't seem to.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-19 23:49    [W:0.075 / U:2.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site