Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>
>> I think you are not following the proper procedure. All the patches
>> should go through akpm.
Ok. I thought it was fine to send simple and obviously correct bug
fixes to Linus.
> One issue is that I actually worry that Andrew will at some point be where
> I was a couple of years ago - overworked and stressed out by just tons and
> tons of patches.
>
> Yes, he's written/modified tons of patch-tracking tools, and the git
> merging hopefully avoids some of the pressures, but it still worries me.
> If Andrew burns out, we'll all suffer hugely.
>
> I'm wondering what we can do to offset those kinds of issues. I _do_ like
> having -mm as a staging area and catching some problems there, so going
> through andrew is wonderful in that sense, but it has downsides.
It is especially challenging for people like me who typically work on
parts of the kernel without a maintainer. So there frequently isn't
an intermediate I can submit my patches to.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |