Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))

Stefan Richter
2008-02-20T15:40:42Z

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:01:14 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> I absolutely have no problem with having a "this is the infrastrcture
>> changes that will go into the next release". In fact, I can even
>> *maintain* such a branch.
>>
>> I've not wanted to open up a second branch for "this is for next release",
>> because quite frankly, one of the other problems we have is that people
>> already spend way too much time on the next release compared to just
>> looking at regressions in the current one. But especially if we're talking
>> about _purely_ API changes etc infrastructure, I could certainly do a
>> "next" branch.
>
> So, will you open such a branch? If so, what would be the mechanics of
> having patches applied to it? I assume people would have to suggest such
> changes explicitly and have them reviewed (hopefully more thoroughly than
> usual) in that light. I guess one place these "infrastructure" changes
> may be noticed would be when subsystem maintainers stray outside their
> subsystem in what they submit to the linux-next tree (or break it).

Two things may largely eliminate the need for parallel branches.

1. Do infrastructure changes and whole tree wide refactoring etc. in a
compatible manner with a brief but nonzero transition period.

2. Insert a second merge window right after the usual merge window for
changes which cannot be well done with a transition period.

(I probably missed a number of points why these two things are not
always feasible, because I am just a downstream person.)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- --=- =-=--