Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262560AbVCCSIo (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:08:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262562AbVCCSHs (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:07:48 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:50321 "EHLO parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262054AbVCCSFQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:05:16 -0500 Message-ID: <422751C1.7030607@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 13:04:49 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040922 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Greg KH , "David S. Miller" , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering References: <42265A6F.8030609@pobox.com> <20050302165830.0a74b85c.davem@davemloft.net> <422674A4.9080209@pobox.com> <42268749.4010504@pobox.com> <20050302200214.3e4f0015.davem@davemloft.net> <42268F93.6060504@pobox.com> <4226969E.5020101@pobox.com> <20050302205826.523b9144.davem@davemloft.net> <4226C235.1070609@pobox.com> <20050303080459.GA29235@kroah.com> <4226CA7E.4090905@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1481 Lines: 35 Linus Torvalds wrote: > In fact, if somebody maintained that kind of tree, especially in BK, it > would be trivial for me to just pull from it every once in a while (like > ever _day_ if necessary). But for that to work, then that tree would have > to be about so _obviously_ not wild patches that it's a no-brainer. > > So what's the problem with this approach? It would seem to make everybody > happy: it would reduce my load, it would give people the alternate "2.6.x > base kernel plus fixes only" parallell track, and it would _not_ have the > testability issue (because I think a lot of people would be happy to test > that tree, and if it was always based on the last 2.6.x release, there > would be no issues. The only problem I see with this -- and its a minor problem -- is that some patches that belong in the 2.6.X.Y tree go straight to you/Andrew, rather than to $sucker. It's perfectly workable from a BK standpoint to do -> linux-2.6 commit -> cpcset into linux-2.6.X.Y [see Documentation/BK-usage/cpcset] -> pull from linux-2.6.X.Y into linux-2.6 [dups cset, but no real code change] but that causes dups in the BK changelog and history. Not a big deal, though, just a minor technical nit. Jeff - 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/