Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Iau, 2005-03-03 at 23:17, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Ideally, the 2.6.x.y maintainer wouldn't need any particular kernel > > development skills - it's just patchmonkeying the things which maintainers > > send him. > > I would disagree, and I suspect anyone else who has maintained a distro > stable kernel would likewise. It needs one or more people who know who > to ask about stuff, are careful, have a good grounding in bug spotting, > races, common mistakes and know roughly how all the kernel works. > Maintainers aren't very good at it in general and they don't see > overlaps between areas very well. >
That is all inappropriate activity for a 2.6.x.y tree as it is being proposed. Am I right? All we're proposing here is a tree which has small fixups for reasonably serious problems. Almost without exception it would consist of backports. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
