Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Nivedita Singhvi wrote: > >> On that note, we were going to start testing the merge patch >> tree starting this week. > > > Hm, do you mean the stuff in the ozlabs tree? The series varies from > fairly solid at one end to completely broken/experimental at the other, > so there's not much point in testing the whole thing. It would > certainly be reasonable to test the initial part of the patch series > though. Right, because testing the full tree was going to be premature, the intent was to test the series of patches ready to go out to -mm. Hence waiting for the current round of work to be done. > Some sanity testing seems reasonable to me. I wouldn't want to post > anything completely broken, but I'm not sure we need to go for intense > testing at this point. The main thing I'm looking for is review Yep, agree. This is intended to just be a minimal check to make sure the stuff reasonably works before it goes into -mm. > comments to make sure that people are happy with the general design > direction and so on, rather than "these are the final patches". But the > patches have to be basically working and usable on some reasonable > configuration, otherwise they can't really be evaluated. > > J Yep, also in case some bug throws up a sticky fundamental problem that might need some agreement on how to proceed. thanks, Nivedita
