From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fengguang Wu Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 25 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 21:30:51 +0800 Message-ID: <20131003133051.GB25934@localhost> References: <20130925144329.7d240a6fa2b5782dc8726340@canb.auug.org.au> <1380156448.17366.44.camel@joe-AO722> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:30634 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753791Ab3JCNbD (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 09:31:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1380156448.17366.44.camel@joe-AO722> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Joe Perches Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 05:47:28PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2013-09-25 at 14:43 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Heads up: I will be having a 3 week break leading up to the kernel > > summit. This means that next-20130927 (next Friday) will be the last > > linux-next release until next-20131028 (or maybe 29). I presume that > > Linus will be up to v3.12-rc7 by then and -rc7 is often the last before > > a release ... Please plan accordingly. > > Hi Stephen. > > Maybe this is a good time for an experiment. > > Perhaps it would be interesting if you still had a script > running every workday and pushed out the result tree without > trying to do any patch conflict resolution yourself. > > Maybe notify the owners of the trees that conflict and let > them work out whatever resolutions that are necessary. > > I think FengGuang's robot can supply most all the details > necessary and maybe you can do a lot less work in the future. It's a good idea, unfortunately Stephen has already went to vocation. I could try the auto merge and merge-failure reports and hand the script over to Stephen when he is back. However the merge conflicts will have to be handled by the relevant developer/maintainers. Thanks, Fengguang