Re: [linuxsh-dev] Drop-In tree updates

[M. R. B. <mr...@0x...>]

* Tom Rini <tr...@ke...> on Thu, Dec 06, 2001:

>=20
> Er, having an $(ARCH) tree makes sure that said $(ARCH) actually has a
> useable tree.  It's always good to try and sync up with
> Linus/Marcelo/Alan, but you don't want to be sending every diff to them
> either.  In the ideal world, kernel.org works for the 95% case for
> $(ARCH) and gets updated from the community tree.
>=20

Call me unorthadox, but, why not?  You see hundreds of small patches on
lkml daily.  Why can't we be in that flurry as well?  Who says that arch
changes must come in one big lump?  According to Linus, they're less likely
to be accepted if they do come in large sizes.

>=20
> You can't just 'send off a diff', you need to create it, test it a bit,
> and hope it doesn't cause any problems.  And then that
> Linus/Marcelo/Alan doesn't loose it in a flood of other patches/emails.
>=20

Um, couldn't "sending a diff off" be interpreted as the 3 steps you just
listed? :)

>=20
> Working in 2.5 is a non-issue for the moment.  2.5 won't work on x86 for=
=20
> a while. Hell, I imagine it'll take a while before Linus doesn't drop=20
> other arch patches on the floor.
>=20

I think everyone can agree on that.  But we still need to get changes for
2.4.x out...

M. R.