On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 09:01:47PM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > On 12/01/2011 04:55 PM, Bryan Schumaker wrote: > > On Thu Dec 1 16:05:03 2011, Steve Dickson wrote: > >> Now what is the motivating reason behind this re-architecture > >> other than making the upstream kernel literally impossible to > >> back port to older kernels?? > >> > > I wasn't thinking about backporting when I did this... is there a > > better way to do this that wouldn't make it a pain to backport? > Yeah... Don't do it! 8-) Major architectural changes always destroy > any all chances of clean back ports... That's why they are generally > done on major releases... the when 3.X was released... There was nothing special about 3.0 other than the name; it could just as easily have been called 2.6.40. But anyway I don't see the big problem for backports. Probably git can deal with the renames automatically, and even if it can't the fixup is going to be pretty obvious. This isn't like the xdr changes that touched so many lines, it's mainly just a simple rename. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
