Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S317261AbSGTAMI>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:12:08 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S317264AbSGTAMI>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:12:08 -0400
Received: from h24-67-14-151.cg.shawcable.net ([24.67.14.151]:9470 "EHLO
	webber.adilger.int") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S317261AbSGTAMH>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:12:07 -0400
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 18:13:13 -0600
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
Cc: Michael Hohnbaum <hohnbaum@us.ibm.com>,
       "Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com>,
       Guillaume Boissiere <boissiere@adiglobal.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6] Most likely to be merged by Halloween... THE LIST]
Message-ID: <20020720001313.GJ10315@clusterfs.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>,
	Michael Hohnbaum <hohnbaum@us.ibm.com>,
	"Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com>,
	Guillaume Boissiere <boissiere@adiglobal.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <3D3875D4.3090102@us.ibm.com> <1027111243.1269.94.camel@dyn9-47-17-90.beaverton.ibm.com> <3D388479.1060908@namesys.com> <20020719232855.GH10315@clusterfs.com> <3D38A29C.9040901@namesys.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3D38A29C.9040901@namesys.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-GPG-Key: 1024D/0D35BED6
X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7A37 5D79 BF1B CECA D44F  8A29 A488 39F5 0D35 BED6
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1747
Lines: 39

On Jul 20, 2002  03:37 +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
> >my understanding is that core changes that aren't in by Halloween are
> >not going to be accepted until 2.7.  By pre-announcing the deadline,
> >it is hoped that people will have lots of time to submit things that are
> >ready for inclusion, as opposed to rushing to submit when the "freeze"
> >is announced all of a sudden.
>
> I, in my egocentrism, think it would make more sense to have a deadline 
> for submission rather than a deadline for acceptance, as that would make 
> things predictable for patch submitters, and avoid unintentional 
> overlooking of good patches from obscure persons due to the crush of 
> patches in October.
> 
> Pre-announcing the deadline is good, but having it be a deadline on 
> something the patch submitters control (submission time not acceptance 
> time) would be even better.

I would agree, except that this doesn't put any onus on the submitters
to get their patches in early, and causes the thundering heard of
patches problem the same way that not announcing the patch deadline does.

Note that "accepted" may be a bad term on my part - I can't say if this
means that the patch has been recieved by Linus, or whether it actually
has to be in the kernel tree at that date.

Note that I wasn't at the kernel summit myself, hence this is all just
what I have heard from others.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/

-
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/