[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] linux-next and process
H. Peter Anvin
hpa at zytor.com
Mon Jun 18 20:39:38 UTC 2012
On 06/18/2012 01:08 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 11:28:12 +1000
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr at canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Also, I am wondering if we should talk a little about the process of
>> being maintainers (I hear groans already :-) - I don't really want to
>> teach you all how to suck eggs) and whether people have any (hopefully
>> positive) criticism of the linux-next process itself.
> I'd like to hear about the code which is turning up in mainline but
> wasn't in linux-next, or wasn't in linux-next in the same form/version.
> How common is this, why is it happening, do we have a problem and if
> so, what do we do about it.
I suspect we need to open up a linux-next for version N+2 as soon as as
version N is released and the version N+1 merge window opens.
One big thing is that if I have actively worked with a contributor to
fix problems before merging into -tip I may send it to Linus even if the
merge window ended up opening, this becomes a judgement call depending
on how good I feel about the finished product, how troublesome the merge
window have been, how valuable I consider it to be to get it into a
particular window, and how responsive the original contributor has been.
I try to flag such pull requests explicitly.
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss