Hi Paul, On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 22:13:50 -0400 Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On a similar note, I was thinking about the recent thread on linux-next > where we were indicating that people shouldn't rebase linux-next content > on a whim, and that new devel (vs. bugfix) content shouldn't appear in > the linux-next content during the merge window. There is no question > that the linux-next process is integral to the main flow of patches to > mainline, so I think Documentation/development-process/2.Process (the > same file) should also capture those points in the linux-next section. > Do you have some pre-canned text we can insert there, or should I draft > something up for you to review? The latter would be certainly easier for me :-) If that is not easy, let me know and I will write something (even without swearing ;-)). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpwVBksCJFZ_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
