> > Non-intrusive bugfixes _are_ welcome after -rc1. > > That's great news to me. > > I think it would really help to get a clarification on what is meant > by "non-intrusive bugfixes" though. Can you elaborate on that? Typo fix in printk() is non-intrusive, 'apply this series' is borderline; if issue is bad enough it may be ok. I guess only Linus can clarify more. > >> > Non-intrusive bugfixes too, afaict. > >> > >> It really depends on what you mean but generally no, and this is why I > >> think this clarification is important. > > > > I believe you are wrong. > > I was actually hoping I would be. But I'd like some confirmation that I am. > > For example, based on your feedback we have a series of fixes we'd > like to try to get merged for 2.6.31-rc2 for ath9k. I have been under > the impression that since those fixes do not meet the criteria > clarified by my original patch on documentation for the rc-series that > they would not get merged and our only option to get users to get > these patches is to wait for 2.6.32 or use some sort of bleeding edge > backport package. We try hard to get out our patches in time prior I believe 'no git merges after rc1' is one of rules. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
