public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Muli Ben-Yehuda <mulix@mulix.org>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
Subject: Re: [CFT/PATCH] give sound/oss/trident a holiday cleanup for 2.6
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:32:08 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FF08F48.4020506@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312291137021.2113@home.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>>Thirty separate patches is OK.
>>
>>We have scripts to handle "patchbombs".
> 
> 
> Yes and no.
> 
> Thirty separate patches make sense if they are independent and really do 
> conceptually different things. Then it makes sense to have them as 
> separate checkins, and be able to tell people "ok, try undoing that one, 
> maybe that's the problem".
> 
> However, if they are all just "fix silly bugs in xxx", then I'd much 
> rather see it as one big patch. Having it split up into "fix bug on line 
> 50" and "fix bug on line 75" just doesn't make any sense - it only makes 
> the patch history harder to follow.


There's certainly a middle ground.  For drivers I generally request that 
bug fixes for separate bugs be split up, since inevitably one bug fix 
out of twenty breaks for somebody on that somebody's weird hardware.

	Jeff




  reply	other threads:[~2003-12-29 20:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-12-29 18:38 [CFT/PATCH] give sound/oss/trident a holiday cleanup for 2.6 Muli Ben-Yehuda
2003-12-29 18:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-29 18:56   ` Muli Ben-Yehuda
2003-12-29 19:09     ` Jeff Garzik
2003-12-29 19:40       ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-29 20:32         ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2004-01-01 23:51   ` Muli Ben-Yehuda
2004-01-02  0:04     ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-02  0:12       ` Muli Ben-Yehuda
2004-01-02  0:26         ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-02  0:39           ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-02  0:43             ` Andrew Morton
2003-12-29 18:53 ` Mike Fedyk

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3FF08F48.4020506@pobox.com \
    --to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mulix@mulix.org \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox