[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1001042206340.2277@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:12:26 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libsrp: fix compile failure
[ added Stephen to CC ]
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, James Bottomley wrote:
> Well, the fact that the compile failure wasn't detected before it went 
> upstream should answer that ...
> 
> But to be more specific: linux-next is our integration tree (and also
> the obscure architecture compile tree).  To ensure the best possible
> integration, every tree should be built and tested in linux-next at
> least once before it goes to Linus.  There were originally technical
> reasons why -mm wasn't in ... I just thought they'd been fixed by now.
/me checks ...
Yes, it indeed is that way -- Andew pulls whole linux-next as one of the 
patches into -mm series.
To make linux-next really working the way it is intended to work we need 
to have -mm part of it, as it is used as a last point for a non-trivial 
amount of patches before they enter Linus' tree.
Andrew, why do we have the current setup, and not the other way around?
Thanks,
-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
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
 
