Hi Jean, On Thu, 11 Jul 2013 19:17:52 -0400 Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > FWIW I would have accepted the patch even if it was not trivial and it > > would have gone in linux-next just the same. The only difference is > > whether I consider the patch for this merge window or only for the next. > > The linux-next tree should not see "new" commits during the two week > window of the merge window -- only content for the active merge window > should be in linux-next during the merge window. Once the rc1 tag has > been completed, then you can add new content. This has been something > that Stephen broadcasts regularly for each merge window start. > > So there is nothing wrong with accepting the patch, but if it isn't destined > for this merge window, then it should not be forwarded to linux-next until > after rc1 gets tagged. > > > Is there a policy to not include new patches in linux-next during a > > merge window if the patch is for the next merge window? If so I wasn't > > aware of it. I always considered that the earlier a patch gets in > > linux-next, the better. > > Yes, see above. As Paul said, new material should not enter linux-next until after -rc1 is released. In fact, every time Linus opens a merge window, I send an email to lkml and the linux-next list saying just that. I also often add that message to the top of my daily release announcements (though I forgot during this merge window). This restriction is imposed so that maintainers still getting their code into the current merge window are not distracted by reports of problems in linux-next to do with code that will not be merged in this merge window. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpOb91OGmWiX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
