From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756177Ab0D0QMT (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:12:19 -0400 Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.71]:57052 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755610Ab0D0QMQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:12:16 -0400 X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 67.160.239.110 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX183SHg4H8GsupjbpEbHFV16 Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:12:17 -0700 From: Tony Lindgren To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap fixes for v2.6.34-rc5 Message-ID: <20100427161217.GB7225@atomide.com> References: <20100426190005.GJ7225@atomide.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds [100427 08:28]: > > On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > Please pull omap fixes from: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git omap-fixes-for-linus > > I pulled it this time, but I'm starting to get really irritated with you. > > These look like real fixes, but quite frankly, by -rc5, that IS NOT > ENOUGH. > > They need to be _regressions_, not just cleanups and fixes for things that > have never worked. And this is starting to be a pattern with the omap > tree: you're not honoring the merge window properly. > > Just "it's a bug-fix" or "it's deleting unused code" is not enough. The > point of the late -rc series is to fix problems from the merge window, not > add new changes. I realize that you think that all the new changes are > obviously good, but the fact is, bugs happen even in "obvious bug-fixes". > > And that's why we have the rule about late-rc pulls being about > _regressions_ and/or major oopses/security issues. Not just random > development that are meant to improve things. OK point taken. I should have dealt with this earlier. Will only queue regressions after -rc3 or so. Regards, Tony