From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: linux-next fixes Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:36:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20131101093638.GE27864@ulmo.nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pY3vCvL1qV+PayAL" Return-path: Received: from mail-bk0-f52.google.com ([209.85.214.52]:63230 "EHLO mail-bk0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751380Ab3KAJgn (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 05:36:43 -0400 Received: by mail-bk0-f52.google.com with SMTP id u14so1027138bkz.25 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 02:36:41 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren , Olof Johansson --pY3vCvL1qV+PayAL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi Stephen, There have been some discussions lately revolving around the topic of linux-next fixes. That is, commits that people come up with over the course of a day to fix issues found in the latest linux-next trees. It's a fact that many people rely on linux-next for everyday work, so whenever things break in linux-next a lot of people end up chasing the same bugs and posting the same patches (or not posting them for that matter). A lot of developer time is wasted that way, so I originally proposed that we could set up a separate linux-next-fixes tree where we collect patches of interest. I volunteer to do that, since, well, I'm doing it anyway as part of my daily routine. Timezone-wise it also fits pretty well, since I usually start my day sometime around when you publish linux-next. If we can establish a canonical location where such fixes are accumulated, people could fetch those at the same time they fetch the linux-next tree and automatically get fixes. One idea was to carry those fixes within the linux-next tree, within separate tags (next-YYYYMMDD-fixes). If you don't feel comfortable with that I suppose we could also set up a separate repository. It that case I think it would still make sense to run it as part of the "Linux Next Group" on kernel.org. What do you think? If it's something you'd be okay with I can contact the administrators to have me added to the linux-next group. Thierry --pY3vCvL1qV+PayAL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSc3YmAAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhUCoP/jXRiv4lVk1k58nWKuG51mdy d3WeNbEJ2Db+yk7rVdzrCHp4wmN9gSIFCQn/7XuBSOm0YQ8hx6pE1DLurjs9KVvH WRnS3nHbxsxNPJItWxA4XgUNZaBmsGiO65BBrO87kxnsJMaKKHMqE2Bbs3Z3pzq+ ihDbj4OIDduepf3tURGP0D4Ndj+GVJ8YilOLEE2YAyDW4IqDjq0PTh3qVUmeH8gl ZGKqHVriVuoEcJBhq2f339lnYYR8vdFrt+LDOV209zRk8jjKA4uDnHhZh1pV+ZtI 85NCMPw3K8EW5py5DKjRMnAXJPJBh8NLfqfn+Pkzy08eDtAXpGsI3drkUC0tT3Pu 8/2DpL85MSz2TULHY6IPBry3VDelUH1jp5Yz14Gcelhw5HA/Kk0jXgKFimDLKP2y ViCBqe3AGetnhMPxJ4uXC4zcLgs/eruyMPPvtqpG6OV4hnR3yMjmsmc2Ax1tU+q8 Yat6q+VvT5Rqb0JHojnv7aVWwI/DFvXI0S31x3RCiVBlCiEzO2pLof8xjvQlrM8K UZsHVYsanjqEl5+PRYgAtDNuPMzgIufC43f/UekkAgD+pCjgeGpwBwFi4tI/mz4E VXdaYKC90P+R/J7Ae8Pknx+lwaA2B0WkdVoD3Y55ws+aR3P3Oi1KEBfFtUo1b2qK qHvV3J/b5NZ5Y42Aq2Wo =tqr1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pY3vCvL1qV+PayAL--