From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934450Ab0CLS12 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:27:28 -0500 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:50273 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934424Ab0CLS11 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:27:27 -0500 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] final scsi updates for 2.6.34-rc1 From: James Bottomley To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: References: <1268242604.22601.25.camel@mulgrave.site> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:27:21 -0600 Message-ID: <1268418441.2802.61.camel@mulgrave.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 10:10 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > OK, I know this is a bit late, but no-one told me the merge window was > > going to close early, but even if they had I'd have been unable to do > > anything about it, since I've been in transit from India all this week > > so far (don't ask ...). > > I'm not going to pull. > > The whole "a few days early" was literally aimed at you and some similar > people who _always_ send the pull request late, literally the last days. > > I'm fed up with it. > > The damn thing should have been ready when the merge window _opened_, not > just before closing. And now there _is_ a tree waiting for me for the next > merge window. Goodie. I do always have a tree ready in the first days of the merge window. It was, in fact, here: commit 654451748b779b28077d9058442d0f354251870d Merge: 64d497f 77c9cfc Author: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri Feb 26 16:55:27 2010 -0800 Merge git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi-misc-2.6 The slight problem is that I accumulate updates (like almost everyone else) from the few days before the merge window opened up until about the middle of the second week. That's what goes into the final pull, plus assorted bug fixes that showed up during the window. I'm not objecting to a shorter merge window, just the unpredictability of all of this. The reason I delay the second pull until the last days of the merge window is so that the proposed changes get the maximum amount of shake down in linux-next ... and that usually means I close down the inclusion window about three days before the pull request goes out. Personally, I do like the two week merge window, because it shakes out contributors to me who should have got their act together but didn't. If you don't like the way this works, fine ... I just need to know what the parameters are to adjust accordingly, so what is it now? A 10 day merge window? James