[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:0.026 / U:12.244 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site