[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: ceph code review
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 12:27:23 -0800 (PST)
Sage Weil <> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The code looks reasonable to me. Unless others emit convincing
> > squeaks, please ask Stephen to include your git tree into linux-next
> > sometime within the next month, then send Linus a pull request for
> > 2.6.33.
> The code has seen 70 odd patches since then. Mostly small fixes and
> cleanups, and a handful of larger changes. Should these see the light of
> LKML before I send a pull request of Linus? (So far they've just gone out
> to the ceph commit list.) I don't want to spam everyone with a huge series
> fixing up as yet unmerged code, but I'm not sure that review on the ceph
> lists is sufficient, given the frequency with which I see fs series on
> LKML...
> What are the best practices here?

My preference would be to fold all the little fixes back into the main
patch series then reissue it all as a nice patchset for people to

But that practice has largely gone by the wayside in recent years
because of git-enforced restrictions :(. It might muck up your
development history to an unacceptable-to-you extent also, dunno.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-03 21:33    [W:0.085 / U:9.076 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site