Hi Christoph, On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:34:04 -0700 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 09:30:59PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > You realise that neither of these in linux-next as the scsi-core and > > scsi-drivers trees had for-3.16 branches in the last round. I assume I > > should just drop these trees completely from linux-next? > > Well, they get pulled in through James, so you can drop them for now. Will do. > I mostly put you on Cc so you could comment wether there are any hard > rules on how long even those simple fixes should be in linux-next. I > know you've put up stats for a few of the last merge windows about > patches that weren't in linux-next, so there's been some tracking of it > for sure. If they are simple, clear fixes, then maybe a day or two just for build coverage, but it is very much up to the maintainer. There are always a few poatches that get through late (quote a few of which I suspect have been "in train", just not yet published in the maintainer's tree). And, of course, real fixes go in just about anytime ... I don't think we believe in hard rules for anything :-) -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
