Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269891AbUJSWFZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:05:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269788AbUJSV7L (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:59:11 -0400 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.194]:30059 "EHLO mproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269926AbUJSVyR (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:54:17 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=KtSwscI4PCsh7WBPkVlGnBeyoNX9tnWZ8YId8RZ1UbyAi9YJlyW41d884KMUjmwbUbQHtxB6J0NM4jqulXX02lus1/CTp3QXXuizv/XLa8nmy6r1tUITUUuqLZzXEaOgX6m0jK+ElRZsOOEj0rv085vQ2tSiN79IsSZ3yw1cJfc Message-ID: <4d8e3fd3041019145469f03527@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:54:16 +0200 From: Paolo Ciarrocchi Reply-To: Paolo Ciarrocchi To: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: BK kernel workflow Cc: Linux Kernel , Larry McVoy , torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <20041019213803.GA6994@havoc.gtf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <41752E53.8060103@pobox.com> <20041019153126.GG18939@work.bitmover.com> <41753B99.5090003@pobox.com> <4d8e3fd304101914332979f86a@mail.gmail.com> <20041019213803.GA6994@havoc.gtf.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2309 Lines: 60 On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:38:03 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:33:40PM +0200, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:06:49 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Although tangential to the problem, I thought LKML and BitMover (and > > > maybe Andrew or Linus as well) might be interested in a general > > > description of my workflow. > > > > > > For net drivers in the Linux kernel, there exists two patch queues, > > > net-drivers-2.6 and netdev-2.6 (and corresponding 2.4 versions). > > > net-drivers-2.6 could be described as the "upstream immediately" or "for > > > Linus" queue, and netdev-2.6 could be described as the "testing" queue. > > > > So you have two bk trees, > > - patches good for mainstream > > - patches good for -mm tree > > Close: > - patches ready for mainstream > - patches eventually ready for mainstream > > and changes flow "up" from netdev-2.6 to net-drivers-2.6. Yup, I hope that almost all the patches move from "patches eventually ready for mainstream" to "patches ready for mainstream" ;-) > > > It would be cool if all the maintainers could adopt your working method, > > Andrew is already automatically pulling from a bunch of trees, why not > > having Linusdoing the same too? > > That's what Linus does already, when I email him :) Good ;) but AFAIK Andrew is not publishing the "patches ready for mainstream" (bk or collection of patches) tree. > But Linus is essentially "senior editor", so we don't want to automate > the system, otherwise there is no editorial control. He is our > emporer penguin, after all. I understand, I know I'm pedantic but can we all see the list of bk trees ("patches ready for mainstream" and "patches eventually ready for mainstream") that we'll be used by Linus ? I'm learning a lot trying to understand the development method used by this community, but there are things that I don't fully understand, is it possible to "formalize" it (somehow) ? Ciao and thanks! -- Paolo Personal home page: www.ciarrocchi.tk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/