Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:50400 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752721AbZLNTqu (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:46:50 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:46:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20091214.114652.243547684.davem@davemloft.net> To: bzolnier@gmail.com Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Revised wireless tree management practices From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <200912142042.13251.bzolnier@gmail.com> References: <200912142016.00169.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20091214.112304.26981627.davem@davemloft.net> <200912142042.13251.bzolnier@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:42:13 +0100 > However looking at "Top non-author signoffs in 2.6.31" [1]: > > David S. Miller 964 10.1% > Ingo Molnar 948 9.9% > Greg Kroah-Hartman 582 6.1% > ... > > it seems that there are people able to do large upstream merges in much > more transparent and reviewer-friendly way so it is not like there exists > some real physical barrier for not even trying to do things better.. Greg (USB, staging) and Ingo (scheduler, perf, tracing, x86) each work in several disconnected areas, and have you seen the size of the staging tree merges? :-)