Hi Linus, On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:01:14 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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). Then I assume most people would start working on a merge of this "next" branch and your "master" branch, right? Consequently, each linux-next would also be based on that merge. I suppose I am stating the obvious (or asking the dumb questions), but I always find it easier to have explicit answers to these sorts of things. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpDS2BQo4HtH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
