[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1308192229360.21654@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 22:34:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: rfc: trivial patches and slow deaths?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> Patches submitted to the trivial address
> trivial@...nel.org seem to go nowhere slowly.
>
> Jiri, do you have any actual plans to try to
> pick up these patches, notify the submitters
> that the patches have been accepted or rejected,
> and forward them on when appropriate?
>
> Otherwise, the patches sit for _months_ without
> any action. That's simply too long.
>
> Should another mechanism or pathway be created
> instead?
Joe,
I disagree. Please look at what is happening in trivial.git over longer
period of time.
The patches I am holding off are larger series which are submitted both to
trivial@ and maintainers as well. With such pathces, it's not clear who is
taking (which parts of) what, hence I hold them off for long time, and get
back to it eventually later.
It's time consuming, as I have to check linux-next for those patches,
hence it's delayed.
One-shot single trivial patches are picked up reasonably fast (i.e. are
very rarely delayed for one Linus' release).
But yes, I agree, you are usually sending cross-tree large patchsets, and
therefore you are often affected by what you describe.
Perhaps if you send to trivial@ only those patches which haven't been
picked up by maintainers already, that'd lead to much faster application
of those, if that's what you are about.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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