Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:55:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:54:11 -0500 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:55496 "HELO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:53:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 19:51:19 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: Rik van Riel Cc: Larry McVoy , Tom Rini , Linus Torvalds , Daniel Phillips , Alexander Viro , Rob Landley , linux-kernel Subject: Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > could this be made: 'as long as they do not touch the same lines of > > code, taking 3 lines of context into account'? (ie. unified diff > > definition of 'collisions' context.) > > That would be _wonderful_ and fix the last bitkeeper problem I'm > having once in a while. perhaps there should also be some sort of authority needed to allow such 'violation' of current BK rules: while the patches to conflict in terms of source code file, we can override it and tell it that they really dont conflict. Ingo - 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/