From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753403AbcD0Q5Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:57:24 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:44028 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752555AbcD0Q5V (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:57:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:57:19 -0700 From: Darren Hart To: Linus Torvalds Cc: LKML Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] platform-drivers-x86 for 4.6-3 Message-ID: <20160427165719.GA51171@f23x64.localdomain> References: <20160427045801.GA13172@f23x64.localdomain> <20160427050213.GA9622@f23x64.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:08:01AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > > > Found myself not wanting to send a one patch pull request, but not wanting to > > wait until RC6 and possibly miss 4.6. > > > > Do you have a preference during the RC cycle in terms of balance between patch > > count and frequency for a small subsystem like platform-driver-x86? > > Once a week like this is fine, even if it's just a single trivial > one-liner change. > > I don't mind small pull requests at all, and I don't see "just one > tiny commit" as being a bad thing. Quite the reverse. Those pull > requests are easy, and it just makes me feel "good, that subsystem is > calm and quiet, but not because the maintainer is not responding to > people". > > In fact, getting small pull requests more often that once a week is > also perfectly fine, although at that point there should be some > _reason_ for it. But there are lots of valid reasons ("this is urgent > because X", but also obviously things like "I maintain five different > topic branches, this fourth pull request this week is for that other > topic"). > > The thing to avoid is a pattern of lots of pointless small pull > requests, and in particular "oh, we found a problem in the last > hurried pull requests, so here's _another_ half-arsed hurried pull > request to fix that". At that point, I'd much rather just see the > maintainer keep the commits in his tree for longer, and test them > better, and just let them cook a bit more. So I _will_ complain if I > notice that there's commits that are very recent and they look dodgy. > > But even there it's the _pattern_ that is annoying. If it happens once > in a blue moon for a maintainer that otherwise has been dependable, > that's fine. I can get really irritated if it's something that > repeats. Very helpful, thank you Linus. I believe I just inherited a TODO to find the right spot in the documentation to record this. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center