LWN: Comments on "KS2009: Staging, linux-next, and the development process" https://lwn.net/Articles/357805/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "KS2009: Staging, linux-next, and the development process". en-us Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:52:01 +0000 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:52:01 +0000 https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification lwn@lwn.net KS2009: Staging, linux-next, and the development process https://lwn.net/Articles/357899/ https://lwn.net/Articles/357899/ mingo <p> At least for the subsystems maintained in the -tip tree there's a consistent pattern you can use to recover fixlets: the tip:*/urgent branches. <p> The current branches are: <pre> core/urgent irq/urgent perf/urgent sched/urgent timers/urgent tracing/urgent x86/urgent </pre> <p> All the stuff separated out in the -tip urgent branches is directed towards Linus's current tree - and if it has a Cc: stable tag then it's directed towards earlier versions as well. <p> Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:02:41 +0000 KS2009: Staging, linux-next, and the development process https://lwn.net/Articles/357876/ https://lwn.net/Articles/357876/ dlang <div class="FormattedComment"> I wonder if it would make sense to have some sort of -pending tree that could contain patches that maintainers think may fix a regression, but are not sure about and gets the latest -rc merged into it after each release. that way people who run into regressions could pull the -pending tree for a quick test to see if the proposed fixes solve the problem or not.<br> <p> currently you have to troll mailing lists, watch for the regression summary messages, or track down the maintainer of the specific component and ask if there is a fix (and that maintainer may or may not recognize your problem as being the same as the one the patch was written for)<br> </div> Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:38:53 +0000