lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux 3.4-rc1

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> [...]
>
> One thing worth pointing out is that the header file cleanups
> were nice, but let's never do them again. Or at least not for
> a release or two. They caused a lot of merge conflicts and
> small annoyances, and while I'm ok with resolving merges, it
> was annoying enough that I don't want to go through that
> immediately again. I know they also annoyed some
> submaintainers that were complaining to me about the pain.

I wasn't amongst those complaining and I agree with the system.h
elimination cleanup, but I think it's better to do these right
at -rc1 time instead of during -rc0 ...

There's very little complex testing needed: only build coverage
on architectures and key configs - one iteration of linux-next
exposure will do that.

So acks can be gathered, it can be rebased to -rc1 or almost-rc1
and can be pulled in (or conflict-merged), before folks grow a
large development tree again.

> That said, I do think they helped. The <asm/system.h>
> disintegration (and to a smaller degree the bug.h cleanups)
> may have been painful, but it definitely cleaned things up.
> [...]

Agreed. We probably need a similar sched.h, fs.h and mm.h
splitting/elimination/shrinking pass as well :-)

> [...] So I guess we *will* do things like this in the future
> again, I just want to forget about the pain before we embark
> on this next time. Ok?

I think this kind of pain is largely avoidable via proper timing
- this one simply wasn't timed properly - pulling it in in the
middle of the merge window was rather crazy and I think you
regretted it on the next morning! ;-)

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-01 10:37    [W:0.150 / U:0.540 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site