From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934823AbXHGOb7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:31:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757419AbXHGObt (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:31:49 -0400 Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:58090 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754195AbXHGObr (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:31:47 -0400 Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] scsi bug fixes for 2.6.23-rc2 From: James Bottomley To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: References: <1186248703.3439.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1186458941.6637.44.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:31:46 -0500 Message-Id: <1186497106.3414.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-2.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 21:01 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > Confused ... you did get the first pull request in the first week. > > Here's the problem. Let me repeat it again: > > > > And after -rc1, I don't want to see crap like this: > > > > > > 46 files changed, 2837 insertions(+), 2050 deletions(-) > > It DOES NOT MATTER if I get a first pull request in the first week, if > that pull request is purely cosmetic, and is followed by stuff that > *should* have been in the merge window four weeks afterwards. > > > OK ... that's arguable. > > There's nothing arguable at all about it. > > If you have 5000 lines of changes, that's not a "bugfix" any more. That's > a big damn change, and it should have happened in the merge window. Or if > it doesn't make it in time, in the *next* merge window. I'm not arguing that the bug fix piece wasn't too big (although realistically, line counts are only a guide not a rule. If we discover something like a calling convention bug in SCSI [reversed kmalloc arguments, say], I could see a huge patch to fix all of the call sites) ... I've said I'll take responsibility for that and fix it. I'm arguing that a too strict an interpretation of bugfix only post -rc1 will damage feature stabilisation. Please think carefully about this. If we go out in a released kernel with a problematic user space ABI, we end up being committed to it forever. James