On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 15:02 -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > On 08/19/2013 04:27:17 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 23:22 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > This is a 7 line patch that corrects logging defects that has had > > no > > > > reply from you for the last month. > > > > > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2833648/ > > > > > > This hasn't missed any Linus' major release, as it has been > > submitted post > > > 3.11 merge, right? (hint, that was Jul 4th). > > > > > > If this would miss *next* major Linus' release, I would accept your > > > complaints. But this is definitely not the case. > > > > You're suggesting this patch, which corrects obvious > > defects, should miss 3.12 and go into 3.13? > > > > I think that's wrong. > > Correcting obvious defects, which can't wait a release, is "trivial" > now, is it? Rob, how do you suggest this obvious and trivial patch be handled? Send 6+ 1 line patches that do the same thing to individual maintainers? The next release in a couple/few weeks is 3.11. 3.12 should take 2.5/3 months for a typical cycle. Patches bound for 3.12 should be in -next today. 3.13 should be out in about half a year. Is it really appropriate to delay the trivially obvious for sixish months? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
