Re: [BK] upgrade will be needed

Anton Altaparmakov
2005-02-19T07:53:46Z

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 23:18:19 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:34:47PM +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, David S. Miller wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:45:55 +0100
> > > > "d.c" <aradorlinux@yahoo.es> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 2) And more important, *nobody* works against "linus' bk head".
> > > >
> > > > I do, %100 exclusively, for all the networking and sparc
> > > > development.
> > > >
> > > > I never work against the -mm tree.
> > >
> > > Dito. All my kernel development happens against Linus' bk head and I
> > > almost never work against -mm tree.
> >
> > Same here, I work on Linus's bk head and all the changes go to -mm for
> > testing first, then to Linus for inclusion.
>
> I guess there is a perception that developers/maintainers are working
> against -mm because all maintainers trees are automatically pulled by
> Andrew. And when someone doing stuff on somewhat regular basis he/she
> tends to do it against maintainer's tree thus making patches suitable
> for -mm as well.

Ah yes, that is possible. However at least for me I work against Linus'
BK head, but my developmental NTFS tree is pulled by Andrew for -mm. When
I consider a release ready I request inclusion into Linus' tree. For
non-ntfs stuff I generally send to Andrew for -mm (like the loop driver
fallback to file write patch I sent him a few days ago) and he can merge
it into mainline later.

I imagine it is simillar for most maintainers trees.

Best regards,

Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/