From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:40:21 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: Linux-2.4.x patch submission policy In-Reply-To: <20010108223343.O10035@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ingo Oeser Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote: > On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 02:37:47PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > > Once we are sure 2.4 is stable for just about anybody I > > will submit some of the really trivial enhancements for > > inclusion; all non-trivial patches I will maintain in a > > VM bigpatch, which will be submitted for inclusion around > > 2.5.0 and should provide one easy patch for those distribution > > vendors who think 2.4 VM performance isn't good enough for > > them ;) > > Hmm, could you instead follow Andreas approach and have a > directory with little patches, that do _exactly_ one thing and a > file along to describe what is related, dependend and what each > patch does? I wasn't aware Andrea switched the way he stored his patches lately ;) But seriously, you're right that this is a good thing. I'll work on splitting out my patches and documenting what each part does. (but not now, I'm headed off for Australia ... maybe I can split out the patches on my way there and cvs commit when I'm there) OTOH, the advantage of having a big patch means that it's easier for me to get people to test all of the things I have. Guess I'll need to find a way to easily get both the small and the big patches ;) regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/ -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/