On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:23:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 09:38 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> > I have to say that I'm not yet convinced that keeping a todo list in a
> > place that's not with the actual source code does not give me warm
> > fuzzy feelings. Every time we've kept information about the source code
> > separate from our source code it's been a failure; it gets out of sync
> > fast and it just adds to the maintenance.
> > 
> > A git commit that both fixes an issue and removed the line from the
> > todo file (or moves it to a "done" section, whatever) is the ultimate
> > goal obviously... having a U: seems to go in exactly the opposite
> > direction.
> > 
> > otoh having a kernel-doc type (eg structured, parsable) way of
> > gathering todo items throughout the tree.... that I can see as useful.
> 
> We could add a toplevel "todo/" directory, with each project file in it
> and a list of things todo. When the todo is done, that same commit could
> remove the todo item.
> 
> Just a worthless thought ;-)

I am with Dmitry on this one.  I really don't want to be prevented from
updating my todo items outside of the merge window.

Different people have different needs, so we need to accommodate todo
lists both within and outside the kernel source tree.

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/