Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:56:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:56:22 -0500 Received: from chmls06.mediaone.net ([24.147.1.144]:53419 "EHLO chmls06.mediaone.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:56:20 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:40:39 -0500 To: Alan Cox Cc: Rob Landley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin Message-ID: <20020129094039.A10150@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net> Mail-Followup-To: Alan Cox , Rob Landley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20020129005155.A6726@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i From: Andrew Pimlott Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:06:09PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > Two, Linus has argued that maintainers are his patch penguins; > > whereas you favor a single integration point between the maintainers > > and Linus. This has advantages and disadvantages, but on the whole, > > I think it is better if Linus works directly with subsystem > > Perl I think very much shows otherwise. I'm really not sure about this example. I assume you mean Perl 5. Last I checked, Perl didn't really operate the way Rob suggests. There is a "patch pumpking", but he is more analogous to Linus than to Alan. In particular, Larry Wall does not review the pumpking's work at all (he instead sets general direction and makes key design decisions). If Perl doesn't have the problems observed in Linux, I think it is because 1) Perl is smaller, 2) Perl 5 is largely in bug-fix mode, 3) Perl has a culture of accepting patches with less scrutiny (without meaning this as a slam, I think you can see evidence of this in the Perl 5 source base). > When you have one or two integrators you have a single tree pretty > much everyone builds new stuff from and which people maintain > small diffs relative to. At the end of the day that ends up like > the older -ac tree, and with the same conditions - notably that > anything in it might be going to see /dev/null not Linus if its > shown to be flawed or not done well. There is an upper bound to the size of the delta one person can maintain (well, assuming his goal is to sync those changes with Linus). Unless Linus's throughput increases dramatically, the integrator's delta will grow until it reaches that bound. At that point, the integrator has to drop patches (or give up!). How do you get around this? Andrew - 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/