From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Nyberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] suspend: Cleanup calling of power off methods. Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 19:36:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20050921173630.GA2477@localhost.localdomain> References: <20050921101855.GD25297@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Pavel Machek , Andrew Morton , "Eric W. Biederman" , len.brown@intel.com, Pierre Ossman , acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, ncunningham@cyclades.com, Masoud Sharbiani , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 09:35:20AM -0700 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > I think you are not following the proper procedure. All the patches > > should go through akpm. > > One issue is that I actually worry that Andrew will at some point be where > I was a couple of years ago - overworked and stressed out by just tons and > tons of patches. > > Yes, he's written/modified tons of patch-tracking tools, and the git > merging hopefully avoids some of the pressures, but it still worries me. > If Andrew burns out, we'll all suffer hugely. > > I'm wondering what we can do to offset those kinds of issues. I _do_ like > having -mm as a staging area and catching some problems there, so going > through andrew is wonderful in that sense, but it has downsides. > Morever bugme.osdl.org is severely underworked (acpi being a noteable exception) and Andrew has stepped in alot there too. Alot of bugs reported on the mailing list are only followed up by Andrew. I think he really should receive much more help than he currently does.