On 03/12/2012 09:04 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 13.03.2012 um 02:39 schrieb Anthony Liguori<anth...@codemonkey.ws>:
On 03/12/2012 08:23 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Let's take a real world example from Linux here. 3.3-rc5 had a pretty nasty
compile bug that made the build break on any 32 bit target when autofs was
activated. I posted the bug plus a small bugfix upstream.
We have a different model than Linux. The development tree is only open for a
short period of time followed by RCs.
Our development tree is open for a long time. There isn't as great a sense of
urgency to fix things out-of-band when you're talking about an active
development cycle. If we were in -rc, it'd be a completely different
discussion.
Really, the issue here is communication. The default assumption is that a
subsystem is owned by the subsystem maintainer. If you want a patch to go
through another channel, just say so. It happens constantly. It's very normal
for people to ask me to apply a patch directly instead of doing a PULL request.
But honestly, if we made a habit of cherry picking patches in areas with an
active maintainer, we would now be talking about how we don't respect
subsystems.
Yeah, we probably will never get the perfect model that fits everyone. Let's
just try, give our best and move on ;).
Agreed!
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Alex
