[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] linux-next and process

Guenter Roeck linux at roeck-us.net
Mon Jun 18 21:10:34 UTC 2012

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 01:39:38PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 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.
Not sure if it should be that limited/restrictive. I sometimes keep patches in
my hwmon-staging branch for several versions, until I am happy with it or, in
some cases, until some other (presumably better) solution shows up and I drop
a patch or patch series entirely.

Sure, I could move some of the patches into drivers/staging, but that only works
for new drivers, and it would make it more difficult to keep my branches in sync.
And, most of the time, new drivers are not in a shape where I would want the
code to show up in a release, drivers/staging or not.


More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list