Re: Wanted: hotfixes for -mm kernels

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>]

> We talked about hotfixes for -mm. So why not check these into the -mm-git tree
> then? This would make sense and would conform fully to my understanding of what
> the -mm-git tree should be. I don't want to select 23 patches from LKML to make
> the tree compile or work. I want to checkout. Why make it easy when you may get
> it difficult.
> 
> Besides testing the stuff we would get more far by being able to test stuff faster
> (because a patch is applied to -mm and we do a checkout) instead of waiting a
> week for this mega-patch to be applied.
> 
> What sense does an -mm tree make when there are people that cannot test it because of
> known bugs that lead to the -mm tree not being bootable or - even worse - destroying
> the system?
> 
> git is you friend. Not only for Linus' tree, but as well for Andrew's tree.
> It would just make debugging and testing -mm more convenient and less time
> consuming for the testers. Instead of 1000 people seeking patches Andrew would
> just check in and we all could pull it.
> 
> If you agree with me or not - that's what I think.

SCMs don't fix anything. The real work is in selecting patches and 
merging them. Frankly,  I test a lot of stuff myself, and the tarballs 
are  a damned sight easier to work with, and have a simple chronological 
timeline to work from.

Yes, of course you don't want to pull 23 separate patches from a mailing 
list. But quilt+tarballs is a crapload simpler than git / bk / cvs / 
subversion, and works just as well, if not better. It just needs a 
script to roll up patches into a consolidated one, and it's not like 
Andrew doesn't have that already.

M.