| 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: <4d8e3fd30801021441h51f180des465f94ed24b107c2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 02:11:44 +0330 From: "Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com> To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>, "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, davem@...emloft.net, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: New branch for +1 kernel Was:Re: [PATCH] Use __u64 in aligned_u64's definition On 1/3/08, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > 2.6.25 actually. You don't take patches this early, do you? > > Yeah, no, I don't take patches early. I've considered setting up another > branch for early patches, but decided that I'm (a) lazy and (b) better off > encouraging people in the late -rc timeframe to just concentrate on the > -rc's, not the next version. This is something i was thinking to suggest. Kernel is made of a lot of different "areas" and the regression list is a great tool for monitoring every single area so why not opening a new branch and accepting patches only for areas which are not in the current regression list.? Sounds like a good way to be more strict about regressions and incentive people to solve regressions quicker. Ciao, -- Paolo http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/ -- 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