linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PATCH] split up feature-removal-schedule.txt

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

Message-ID: <20080219194909.GA17802@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:49:10 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] split up feature-removal-schedule.txt

On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 11:34:22AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:07:45 -0800 Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 10:13:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > MAINTAINERS is the most frequently patched file
> > > 
> > > Almost all of them merge perfectly, with no problems what-so-ever. And the 
> > > merge conflicts, when they happen, are generally really trivial, and never 
> > > cause any subtle run-time bugs even if they were to happen.
> > > 
> > > So in that sense, I think both MAINTAINERS and the deprecation schedule 
> > > are totally uninteresting. Yes, they have merge conflicts. But those merge 
> > > conflicts are really really easy to handle.
> > 
> > Yes, they are easy to handle, but for trees that have to deal with these
> > merge issues all the time, they are a pain (hit this one again today.)
> > It takes a few minutes to fix up the resolution by hand (using either
> > git or quilt), as we do want the new addition to be in the file, so by
> > splitting it up, it makes our (the sub-tree maintainers) lives easier.
> > 
> > I've never had a problem with the MAINTAINERS file, as it is pretty big
> > and conflicts for me seem to never happen, but the feature-removal file
> > does cause problems as it changes over time and things need to get added
> > and removed.
> > 
> > Also, there are already remants of a bad-merge in that file, which
> > somehow sneaked through.
> > 
> > Yes, these files can not cause kernel bugs, but they are semi-important
> > to at least get correct.  So I'd ask you to reconsider for the
> > feature-removal stuff at the very least.
> > 
> > If you do, the git tree is still there at:
> > 	master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/driver-2.6.git/
> > 
> > to pull from :)
> 
> Alternatively, since they are easy to fix, I'll volunteer to fix them
> (after notified of problems :).  (and not split up the file)

Well, the problem is that when someone sends me a patch, I have to do
the fixups by hand (same goes for Jeff), in order for you, or anyone
else to even be able to see the patch show up anywhere.

That's why having this split up will help make the sub-tree maintainers
lives easier, it's not an issue for Andrew and Linus, as usually the
problem is all fixed up by the time the patch makes it there :)

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/