Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Was cc'ed to linux-net last Thursday, but it looks like the messages was
too large and the vger server munched it.
This also brings up a larger question... why was a completely unreviewed
net driver merged?
Because nobody noticed that it didn't make it to the mailing list,
obviously.
That's ducking the question. Let me rephrase.
Why was a complete lack of response judged to be an ACK?
That's not uncommon. I don't ask people "are you reading the mailing list
which you should be reading" unless I think it's someone who doesn't read
the mailing lists which they should be reading.
For new drivers, that's a -horrible- precedent. You are quite skilled at poking random hackers :) why not poke somebody to ack a new drivers?
In this case I didn't think about it very hard, sorry - figured it was s390
stuff and it hence falls under the "if it breaks, it's the s390 team's
problem" exemption.
It's not like this driver (or many of the other new drivers) desperately need to get into the kernel ASAP, so desperate that a lack of review was OK.
True. But it's not as if we can't fix stuff up after it's merged up. The
reasons for holding off on a merge would be:
a) We're not sure that the feature should be merged at all
b) Holding off on a merge is a tool we use to motivate the submitter to
fix the code up
c) The merge breaks existing stuff.
I don't think any of those things apply here. The only downside is the
increased bk patch volume.