Re: stable cc's in linux -next was Re: [BUG] x86: bootmem broken onSGI UV

From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Sat Oct 09 2010 - 19:51:37 EST


Hi Linus,

On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 16:24:59 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Quite frankly, if somebody has something in "next" (and really meant
> for the _next_ merge window, not the current one) that is marked for
> stable, I think that shows uncommonly bad taste. And that, in turn,
> means that the "stable" tag is also very debatable. It clearly cannot
> be important enough to really be for stable if it's not even being
> aggressively pushed into the current -rc.

There are 22 trees that get merged into in linux-next that are "bug fixes
for the current release" trees ... that was the list I sent you after the
-rc7 announcement (most of which I think you have since merged. In
fact, there are currently only 5 commits in those 22 trees that you have
not merged.

The other thing people do is to add such bug fixes to their -next trees
before asking you to take them.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature