Re: [GIT PATCH] scsi bug fixes for 2.6.23-rc2

[Jeff Garzik]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > I fully agree, and firmly believe that the current stabilisation works
> > incredibly well for shaking out bugs.  My problem is that it doesn't
> > work for stabilising features.  Either we have to get far more people
> > doing feature integration testing before the merge window, or we have to
> > accept feature updates after the merge window (for existing features
> > that are having stability issues).
>
> The other alternative is that if Linus won't take updates you ask him to
> revert bsg so that you don't get a half baked merge as a result of this.
> I'm not sure that is a good path to follow either however.

Like everything else in life, it's a balance.  If something is clearly 
half-baked and requires a bunch of post-rc1 changes just to be usable, a 
revert might make a lot of sense.

It's questions of: how much further change is required, how invasive are 
those changes, how half-baked and incomplete is the feature really, what 
is the downside of a revert, ...

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/