Sponsored link
Vyatta –
Linux & Open Source
Alternative to Cisco –
Advanced Routing,
Firewall, VPN, QoS..
Free Download ->
| |||||||||||||||||||
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Avi Kivity wrote: > > The changes fall into three broad categories: > - initial kvm paravirtulization support > - the first batch of the stable userspace interface changes > - fixes, fixes, fixes This is the absolute last time I say this. WAY too late. You'd better get this in before -rc1 next time around. I want *FIXES*ONLY* by now, and next time I see crap like this I'm going to ignore it until you fix me a pull that contains fixes only, and I'm not even going to pull during the next merge window because I'm not interested in merging something that isn't maintained and doesn't get those "fixes only" trees. So I pulled this now, but the fact is, I already ignored this once exactly because it wasn't appropriate to pull at this point. Yes, I soemtimes miss emails, but dammit, quite often it's also because I just judge the email to be *CRAP* and simply not worth bothering with. 750 new lines of code, with much of it apparently being new features, and stupid cleanups and cosmetics that don't actually fix anything simply isn't "post-rc2 material". I really *really* don't want to see this again! I'm really fed up with having to pull big changes after the merge window, because it just doesn't seem to let up. I'm going to go postal on the next maintainer who doesn't understand what "merge window" and "fixes only" means. Linus (Log in to post comments)
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2 Posted Mar 8, 2007 16:52 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (subscriber, #15888) [Link] Seems to me like it might be time to split off 2.7.
I know with 2.6 and git it's been possible to do the new stuff along with maintenance, but that seems to be becoming less true. With a dev tree, Linus wouldn't have to worry (as much) about pulling in new features with fixes.
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2 Posted Mar 9, 2007 17:02 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] Well, Linus could just open up a 2.6.21 tree the day he announces the 2.6.20 freeze. He's said in the past that the reason he doesn't do this is because, in his experiences, all eyeballs go to 2.6.21. 2.6.20, instead of getting pounded into shape, just stagnates.
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2 Posted Mar 11, 2007 15:45 UTC (Sun) by landley (subscriber, #6789) [Link] They called it 2.6.16, which is up to .42. There was resoundingindifference.
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2 Posted Mar 8, 2007 18:53 UTC (Thu) by kingdon (subscriber, #4526) [Link] Unfortunately for Linus, actions speak louder than words and his action here was "So I pulled this now".
Seems to me like this has been going on since 2.1.x days (or so it seems to someone who isn't doing kernel development myself). It isn't so much the process (a merge window of a month, versus a merge window of a year or two in the 2.1, 2.3, and 2.5 cases), but what happens to patches which come in after they should. Time to take up a collection for the Linus backbone fund?
Re: [GIT PULL][RETRY] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.21-rc2 Posted Mar 17, 2007 7:41 UTC (Sat) by muwlgr (guest, #35359) [Link] I think Mr. Kivity leads such a fashionable kernel enhancement that he could easily publish hist own tree and attract testers to it like that was witn -mm trees. And may be -kvm tree would gain at least that many testers as -mm does. Being in mainline is even more great, but this separate tree would prevent such conflicts as above.
Btw, I used/tested -mm trees in 2.5 epoch, waiting for 2.6.0 release (starting may be from 2.5.60), and a little since then, may be until 2.6.10 or 2.6.11 came out. That was quite a difference from 2.4, overally positive, but I always kept my previous images to promptly revert to them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||