Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [GIT]: Networking | From | Marcel Holtmann <> | Date | Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:33:20 +0200 |
| |
Hi Linus,
> > John was just pointing out (like myself before) that a lot of people are > > under the impression that documentation updates and new drivers should > > not be queued up and merged as soon as possible. > > I think (and hey, I'm flexible, and we can discuss this) that the rules > should be: > > - by default, the answer should always be "don't push anything after the > merge window unless it fixes a regression or a nasty bug". > > Here "nasty bug" is something that is a problem in practice, and not > something theoretical that people haven't really reported. > > - but as a special case, we relax that for totally new drivers (and that > includes things like just adding a new PCI or USB ID's to old drivers), > because (a) it can't really regress and (b) support for a specific > piece of hardware can often be critical. > > With regard to that second case, I'd like to note that obviously even a > totally new driver _can_ regress, in the sense that it can cause build > errors, or problems that simply wouldn't have happened without that > driver. So the "cannot regress" obviously isn't strictly true, but I > think everybody understands what I really mean. > > It should also be noted that the "new driver" exception should only be an > issue for things that _matter_. > > For example, a machine without networking support (or without suppoort for > a some other really core driver that provides basic functionality) is > practically useless. But a machine without support for some particular > webcam or support for some special keys on a particular keyboard? That > really doesn't matter, and might as well wait for the next release. > > So the "merge drivers early" is for drivers that reasonably _matter_ in > the sense that it allows people to test Linux AT ALL on the platform. It > shouldn't be "any possible random driver". > > IOW, think about the drivers a bit like a distro would think about > backporting drivers to a stable kernel. Which ones are really needed? > > Also, note that "new driver" really should be that. If it's an older > driver, and you need to touch _any_ old code to add a new PCI ID or > something, the whole argument about it not breaking falls away. Don't do > it. I think, for example, that the SCSI people seem to be a bit too eager > sometimes to update their drivers for new revisions of cards, and they do > it to old drivers. > > And finally - the rules should be guidelines. It really isn't always > black-and-white, but most of the time the simple question of "could this > _possibly_ be just queued for the next release without hurting anything" > should be the basic one. If the answer is "yes", then wait.
I am perfectly fine with these rules. You only had to spell them out :)
Regards
Marcel
| |