On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:That is largely on purpose. There's two choices: - have a longer and calmer merge window, spread out the joy, and have people test and fix their things during the merge window too. In other words, less black-and-white. - Really short merge window, and use the extra time *after* it to fix the issues. and I've obviously gone for the latter. In fact, I'd personally like to make it even shorter, because the problem with the long merge window can be summed up very simply: Long merge windows don't work - because rather than test more, it just means that people will use them to make more changes! So one of the major things about the short merge window is that it's hopefully encouraging people to have things ready by the time the merge window opens, because it's too late to do anything later. And yes, we could have some other way of enforcing that - allow the merge window to be longer, but have some other mechanism to make sure that I only merge old code. In fact, I'd personally *love* to have a hard rule that says "I will only pull from trees that were already 'done' by the time the window opened", and we've been kind-of moving in that direction. But that wish is counteracted by the fact that the merges themselves do need some development, so expecting everything to be ready before-hand is simply not realistic. Also, while I'd like trees to be ready when the window opens, at the same time I do think that it's good to spread out some of it, and get *some* basic testing - even if it's just a nightly build and a few tens of developers. And really, that's all that we'd expect during the merge window. We want to find the *obvious* problems - build issues, and the things that hit everybody, but let's face it, the subtle ones will take time to find regardless. Then, the short merge window means that we have more time when we really don't have big changes going in to find the subtle ones. (And making the release cycle longer would *not* help - that would just make the next merge window more painful, so while it can, and does, work for some individual release with particular problems, it's not a solution in the long run). Linus --
| Ingo Molnar | Re: [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60 |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | Re: [Bug 10030] Suspend doesn't work when SD card is inserted |
| Jamie Lokier | Proposal for "proper" durable fsync() and fdatasync() |
| jimmy bahuleyan | Re: how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3? |
git: | |
| Martin Langhoff | Handling large files with GIT |
| Matt Mackall | Re: cleaner/better zlib sources? |
| Wink Saville | git-svn segmetation fault |
| Bill Lear | Meaning of "fatal: protocol error: bad line length character"? |
| Florin Andrei | firewall is very slow, something's wrong |
| Wijnand Wiersma | Almost success: OpenBSD on Xen |
| Marcus Andree | Re: OpenBSD kernel janitors |
| Richard Stallman | Real men don't attack straw men |
| David Miller | Re: tcp bw in 2.6 |
| Rick Jones | Re: 2.6.24 BUG: soft lockup - CPU#X |
| Patrick McHardy | [NET_SCHED 00/04]: External SFQ classifiers/flow classifier |
| Patrick McHardy | Re: [PATCH 2/2] [e1000 VLAN] Disable vlan hw accel when promiscuous mode |
