From: Stephen Rothwell <email@example.com>
Cc: Kay Sievers <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jan Blunck <email@example.com>,
Andrew Morton <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Linus <email@example.com>, Greg KH <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: linux-next procedures: (Was: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the driver-core tree with the tracing tree)
Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 15:13:56 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2623 bytes --]
[Greg, this is not directed only at you, but is a wider issue and you
have given me the opportunity to dicsuss it].
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:22:56 -0700 Greg KH <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 03:01:15PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > [Aside: the first I can find of this is the patch submission to LKML
> > within the last day ... so "posted, reviewed, unit tested"? I assume
> > this has had some discussion somewhere, but Google doesn't know where.]
> It was posted today for discussion, which didn't seem to happen.
That was my point - waiting less than a day between the posting of a new
feature publicly and its inclusion in linux-next seems a bit impatient.
*And* you seem to have gotten some discussion now :-).
> It has been unit tested a lot in SuSE's kernels with review from our
> kernel developers (hence the 3 signed-off-bys). We use it to speed up
> booting a lot because we have to use an initramfs (like all distros need
> to for various reasons.) It aleviates the udev coldplug issues a lot,
> and the embedded developers have been very happy to see this (for some
> reason they only like writing private emails, not to the list, which is
Having seen what is coming in this patch for linux-next on Monday it is
clear that there is more work to be done on this before it is ready for
Linus' tree. linux-next is for integration testing, it is not a
development tree. Everything in it should, in the tree maintainers
opinion, be ready for Linus' tree (if he happens to go insane and open
the merge window unexpectedly). I am making no comment about this
particular feature, just what should be in the linux-next tree.
I would expect maintainers to have (at least) three (publicly available)
trees (where "tree" can be a quilt (sub)series, or a git branch etc):
development, ready and bug-fixes. Development is ongoing work and new
features, not yet ready for Linus' tree. Ready is pretty much done - it
may not be bug free, but it is (as far as is reasonably possible) tested
and ready to go into Linus' tree. Bug-fixes is the stuff for Linus after
the merge window closes.
Maybe I have not made this clear enough in the past, but linux-next
should really (except for a couple of clear exceptions like "staging")
only contain the ready and bug-fixes trees.
Discussion, anyone? I am open to changes if people think things should
be run differently, but the above makes sense to me.
Stephen Rothwell email@example.com
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-02 5:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-01 5:01 linux-next: manual merge of the driver-core tree with the tracing tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-05-01 5:22 ` Greg KH
2009-05-02 5:13 ` Stephen Rothwell [this message]
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).