Re: [RFQ] Rules for accepting patches into the linux-releases tree

["Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>]

Shawn Starr wrote:
> How does this fit into Rusty's trivial patch bot?  This process will fold that 
> into a formal method now?
> 
> Shawn.

Nope, no comparison or interaction really.  x.y (linux-release)
isn't meant for trivial patches at all, whereas trivial isn't
meant for critical patches either.

> 
>>List:       linux-kernel
>>Subject:    [RFQ] Rules for accepting patches into the linux-releases tree
>>From:       Greg KH <greg () kroah ! com>
>>Date:       2005-03-04 22:21:46
>>Message-ID: <20050304222146.GA1686 () kroah ! com>
>>[Download message RAW]
>>
>>Anything else anyone can think of?  Any objections to any of these?
>>I based them off of Linus's original list.
>>
>>thanks,
>>
>>greg k-h
>>
>>------
>>
>>Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into
>>the "linux-release" tree.
>>
>> - It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context.
>> - It must fix only one thing.
>> - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
>>   problem..." type thing.)
>> - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
>>   marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, or a real security issue.
>> - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how
>>   the race can be exploited.
>> - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
>>   whitespace cleanups, etc.)


-- 
~Randy