On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:55:33 -0700 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > You're right, thanks, will add that. Since you bring this up, are > there a lot of trees not using the foo-next-2.6.git convention? Hmm, it seems like I have seen a wide variety of tree names and/or branch names included in the git pull requests ... also, the tree/branch names used in linux-next: http://linux.f-seidel.de/linux-next/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Linux-next.IncludedTrees seem to be all over the map ... > > Again, seemingly too rigid based on what really happens ... but > > maybe this is documenting the "ideal" > > Well I take it that the maintainers who know they can get away with > some excemptions here don't need to read this to figure that out. But > I suppose it may be worth mentioning excemptions do exist, for the > record. BTW, just curious, are there any examples of this? I think you have created a new word: excemptions :) I kinda like it, but I think you mean exceptions. I think there are multiple examples of new features being merged after -rc1, but nothing comes to mind immediately ... I think the plan is to only add features during the merge window, but it occasionally gets overridden ... > Yes, thanks. BTW are you up for taking a stab at this yourself? I'm > not sure when I'll be able to again. Jon may have some comments, when he has a chance to look ... let's see where it goes from there ... jake -- Jake Edge - LWN - jake@xxxxxxx - http://lwn.net -- 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
