Re: 2.3 and ami_int3

[Michel <dae...@st...>]

Frank Petzold wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 11:41:15AM +0300, Jouko Pynnonen wrote:
> >
> > What's the committing policy? Some of the changes are temporary fixes so i
> > thought it's better to discuss on the list whether they make sense. I can
> > post the diffs though.
> 
> It is probably best to spawn a branch and commit to that.

I don't agree for the 2.3 module. Everybody knows that code in there is
unstable. And what's the use of CVS if everybody spawns a branch for what he's
working on?

And at least in this case, I guess everyone likes to have a booting kernel in
the first place, even if it may have its quirks.


> I don't think we hava an official policy.

No, but a discussion to get one might be good.


> And yes, it good to discuss changes on the ML. As stated in the CVS manual:
> CVS does not substitute communication.

Of course :)


Michel


-- 
UNIX is like Sex:
If you don't know it, you don't miss it. But if you know it, you'll need it.
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)  \  CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \   member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS