On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 08:49 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 21:57 +0100, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > > Quite frankly, I'm not going to take this.
> > > 
> > > None of what you describe sounds like regressions, and this is just TOO 
> > > F*CKING LATE to take big changes like this, to a fragile subsystem that 
> > > has historically easily introduced new regressions.
> > > 
> > > Can you please make a branch with ONLY REGRESSIONS, or fixes for major 
> > > problems that don't introduce several thousand lines of new code?
> > > 
> > > Because you seem to be constantly unable to understand what "merge window" 
> > > means. And I'm not going to take this kind of crap.
> > 
> > I thought you might say that, I'll re-send with just the ones that fix the 
> > major issues, instead of ones that fix issues people wanted fixed. Most of 
> > the real bits were in Rawhide kernels for a few weeks, which tbh kicks the 
> > ass outta a linux-next/linux-mm test cycle.
> > 
> > Your reply now serves as place to point people at when they ask why Red 
> > Hat/Fedora ships features that they can't get for 1-6 months, and I'm fine 
> > with that.
> 
> 6 months sounds too long, there's at least one merge window in such a
> time-frame.

Right - just realized its 2*cycle for max latency here. The next cycle
also needs to finish before Joe User gets it.

/me now goes fetch a nice hot cup of tea and wake up..

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/