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

Greg KH
2005-03-05T17:49:14Z

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:59:17PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:21:46PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > Anything else anyone can think of? Any objections to any of these?
> > I based them off of Linus's original list.
>
> Are these 100% fixed rules or just guidelines you use?

Guidelines of course :)

> An example that doesn't fit:
>
> A patch of me to remove an unused function was accepted into 2.6.11 .
> Today, someone mailed that there's an external GPL'ed module that uses
> this function.
>
> A patch to re-add this function as it was in 2.6.10 does not fulfill
> your criteria, but it is a low-risk way to fix a regression compared to
> 2.6.10 .

Yes, I wouldn't have a problem with adding this kind of fix. Do others
disagree?

thanks,

greg k-h