|| ||"Will Newton" <will.newton-AT-gmail.com>|
|| ||"Greg KH" <greg-AT-kroah.com>|
|| ||Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-staging tree created|
|| ||Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:45:55 +0100|
|| ||linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, devel-AT-linuxdriverproject.org,
"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr-AT-canb.auug.org.au>|
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Greg KH <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> This tree will be included in the daily linux-next builds, and will get
> testing by all users of that tree.
> The rules of what can be included here is as follows:
> - the code must be released under a Linux kernel-compatible
> - the goal of the developers must be to merge this code into the
> main kernel tree in the near future, but not for the next
> kernel release.
> - the code must build properly on the x86 platform
> - this is not a tree for bugfixes or rewrites of existing kernel
> code, this should be for new features, drivers, and
> - the patches included must detail exactly what is needed to be
> completed in order for them to be included into the main
> kernel tree.
> - there must be some email address associated with the patch
> that can be used for bug reporting and questions about
> cleanups and testing the code.
> What this tree is not:
> - it is not a place to dump features that are being actively
> developed by a community of people (reiserfs4 for example.)
> - it is not a place to dump code and then run away, hoping that
> someone else will do the cleanup work for you. While there
> are developers available to do this kind of work, you need to
> get someone to agree to "babysit" the code.
Would the linux-staging tree be an appropriate place to merge a new
architecture? Or would that be too large a change and should go via
its own tree?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
to post comments)