On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:59:17PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:21:46PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > > Anything else anyone can think of? Any objections to any of these? > > I based them off of Linus's original list. > > Are these 100% fixed rules or just guidelines you use?
Guidelines of course :) > An example that doesn't fit: > > A patch of me to remove an unused function was accepted into 2.6.11 . > Today, someone mailed that there's an external GPL'ed module that uses > this function. > > A patch to re-add this function as it was in 2.6.10 does not fulfill > your criteria, but it is a low-risk way to fix a regression compared to > 2.6.10 . Yes, I wouldn't have a problem with adding this kind of fix. Do others disagree? thanks, greg k-h - 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/
