[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200805010452.14475.elendil@planet.nl>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 04:52:13 +0200
From: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: paulus@...ba.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl,
davem@...emloft.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jirislaby@...il.com
Subject: Re: Slow DOWN, please!!!
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> By the way, if you do want to make that rule, then there's a really
>> easy way to do it - just pull linux-next, and make that one pull be
>> the entire merge window. :)
>
> That's a unique and interesting idea...
Full ack.
Especially if there was some kind of "pre-merge linux-next freeze" where
people (arch maintainers, kernel testers) would be actively invited to do
pre-merge testing.
During that period only changes that fix reported issues (be it build issues
or regressions) would be allowed:
- either a revert of the problematic commit
- or a targeted fix
This could even hugely improve the bisectability of mainline after the merge
as such changes could be merged/rebased into the subsystem tree _before_
Linus pulls them into mainline.
Currently I avoid -next and -mm and I also don't do any merge window
testing. Why? Too much flux, too many issues, too much energy required.
But if there was some sort of pre-merge call for testing of an identifiable
and relatively stable tree, I would definitely participate in that and be
willing to spend time to bisect the hell out of any issues I'd find.
Cheers,
FJP
--
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