[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] structuring of tools et.al and linux-devel.git repo

Steven Rostedt rostedt at goodmis.org
Tue Jun 19 18:19:26 UTC 2012

On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 11:04 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 13:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 2) Creating a linux-devel.git repo
> > 
> > Some of the discussion so far has been about code getting into Linus's
> > tree without going through linux-next. Or changing between the two. I
> > would like to suggest adding a linux-devel.git repo that would let
> > anyone that requests to add their development code to this repo. It may
> > even spot duplicate work that is going on, or a place to house competing
> > projects where it will be easier to do comparisons.
> I'm not sure there's really a need for another
> aggregate tree prior to Linus' that is unchangeable.
> -next is today effectively -devel.

It shouldnt' be.

> I think the concept that there are multiple
> invariant master trees that cannot stand reverts
> is flawed.  Reverts aren't _that_ painful and
> contain useful history showing what works and
> what doesn't.

and breaks bisecting.

I constantly rebase my work before I push it public, so that I have a
nice bisectable history. I have branches that last for a year, that
basically works, but still is being tweaked upon. Just not 'ready for
mainline' bit.

When things hit linux-next, it should be ready for the next release
cycle. It's more of the final integration process, to make sure two
changes do not cause one or the other to fail. Something in linux-next
should not be there for 6 months. That just means it wasn't ready.

-- Steve

More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list