[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <585752805.112641.1711575209551.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 22:33:29 +0100 (CET)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, tytso <tytso@....edu>,
Tyler Hicks <code@...icks.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: trees being removed
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
>> > ubifs-fixes 2023-01-21 16:27:01 -0800
>> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rw/ubifs.git#fixes
>>
>> fscrypt-current and fsverity-current are technically still in use. I just
>> haven't used them recently because there haven't been any bug fixes that needed
>> to go in while other commits were already applied for the next merge window.
>>
>> I've updated them to v6.9-rc1.
>>
>> I'd guess that some of those *-fixes branches have something similar going on,
>> where they may be rarely used fixes branches as opposed to the main development
>> branch.
>>
>
> This is exactly my case. I don't mind my branch being dropped and I can
> ask to add it back once I have urgent fixes.
Same here. It turned out that the next branch is good enough for me.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists