linux-kernel - Re: cris port lacks a merge?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:08:43 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	"Mikael Starvik" <mikael.starvik@...s.com>
Cc:	"'Adrian Bunk'" <bunk@...sta.de>, "dev-etrax" <dev-etrax@...s.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: cris port lacks a merge?

 > The problem is that every time I try the following happens:
 > 
 > 1. I download the bleeding edge latest stuff that you can get
 > 2. I prepare and submit patches
 > 3. I get replies with comments on my patches
 > 4. I fix the patches.
 > 5. I get told that the patches are against a too old version
 > 6. Repeat from 1.

One way to reduce your backlog might be to choose a small subset of
the most urgent out of all your pending patches -- say, the minimum
required to get cris working if it doesn't build/work in the latest
kernel, or the most urgent bug fixes if it does still work -- and then
update just that subset.  By reducing the number of patches, you can
reduce the amount of time in step 4 and reduce the chance of entering
step 5.

Then, once that batch is merged, move on to the next most urgent set
of patches, etc.

Also, creating a git tree might make the job of rebasing patches
easier, and also reduces the friction in getting Linus to merge your
patches.

 - R.
-
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/