On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:55:33 -0700 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:

quoted text
> 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 ...

quoted text
> > 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 ...

quoted text
> 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@lwn.net - http://lwn.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html