| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200609262323.10190.ak@suse.de> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:23:10 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> To: discuss@...-64.org Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: x86/x86-64 merge for 2.6.19 > > That said, the merges with Andrew are also sometimes in the 150+ patch > range, and merging with other git trees can sometimes bring in even more. > So I'm not claiming any hard limits or anything like that, just that in > general it's nicer to get updates trickle in over time rather than all at > once. > > I suspect this was mostly a one-time startup-event. It accumulated a bit because the .18 cycle was relatively long (and i also did more patches that usual myself, but most of that was just cleanup and general janitor work) I normally do the main bulk the two week merge window and only important stuff afterwards (usually two or three smaller merges with more stuff and then only critical bug fixes in small batches until release). You want merges more often or more spaced out? I currently planned to do better spaced out posting for review at least (to not overwhelm the various mailing lists). It would be possible to do the merge towards you shortly after that when patches cooked a bit in -mm*. But it won't follow the two week window all that much. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists