On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:12:49 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:If past experience is a guide, it's about to get harder because a) maintainers jam untested crap^W^Wrecently-received features into their trees so they don't miss the merge window and b) a storm of git rejects turn up as Linus's tree starts to get changed. Hopefully b) will improve, as "all" the new code has already gone through linux-next merging. As for a), well, it would be nice if people were to be careful about that sort of thing. In some ways it's justifiable - we _do_ have a couple months to fix remaining glitches. But one would think that when fast-tracking new features, the code would at least get additional review and testing to make up for it. --
| H. Peter Anvin | Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 002/196] Chinese: rephrase English introduction in HOWTO |
| Ingo Molnar | [patch] PID namespace design bug, workaround |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
git: | |
| Eric Dumazet | Re: Multicast packet loss |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
