Alan Cox wrote:
I fully agree, and firmly believe that the current stabilisation works
incredibly well for shaking out bugs. My problem is that it doesn't
work for stabilising features. Either we have to get far more people
doing feature integration testing before the merge window, or we have to
accept feature updates after the merge window (for existing features
that are having stability issues).
The other alternative is that if Linus won't take updates you ask him to
revert bsg so that you don't get a half baked merge as a result of this.
I'm not sure that is a good path to follow either however.
Like everything else in life, it's a balance. If something is clearly
half-baked and requires a bunch of post-rc1 changes just to be usable, a
revert might make a lot of sense.
It's questions of: how much further change is required, how invasive are
those changes, how half-baked and incomplete is the feature really, what
is the downside of a revert, ...
Jeff
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
