On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 21:01 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > Confused ... you did get the first pull request in the first week. > > Here's the problem. Let me repeat it again: > > > > And after -rc1, I don't want to see crap like this: > > > > > > 46 files changed, 2837 insertions(+), 2050 deletions(-) > > It DOES NOT MATTER if I get a first pull request in the first week, if > that pull request is purely cosmetic, and is followed by stuff that > *should* have been in the merge window four weeks afterwards. > > > OK ... that's arguable. > > There's nothing arguable at all about it. > > If you have 5000 lines of changes, that's not a "bugfix" any more. That's > a big damn change, and it should have happened in the merge window. Or if > it doesn't make it in time, in the *next* merge window. I'm not arguing that the bug fix piece wasn't too big (although realistically, line counts are only a guide not a rule. If we discover something like a calling convention bug in SCSI [reversed kmalloc arguments, say], I could see a huge patch to fix all of the call sites) ... I've said I'll take responsibility for that and fix it. I'm arguing that a too strict an interpretation of bugfix only post -rc1 will damage feature stabilisation. Please think carefully about this. If we go out in a released kernel with a problematic user space ABI, we end up being committed to it forever. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
