> > >> Now there's a new list for the discussion of new and
> > >> still alpha-quality patches.
> > >
> > >But this is what linux-kernel is for.
> >
> > I agree. linux-kernel is the place for discussions of bugs and patches.
>
> Linux-kernel is the place for discussions of bugs and
> patches that are inside the kernel.
s/are inside/relate to/
By it's very nature, the standard Linus kernel doesn't contain "patches".
> There are, however, a whole lot of patches that aren't
> ready for integration into the kernel yet. We don't want
> those patches discussed on linux-kernel...
I do. We don't necessarily need every little bug report for such a patch,
but discussion of its intent, design, and implementation is exactly what
linux-kernel is for, in my opinion.
Unofficial patches and test results thereof don't form a significant
amount of traffic on linux-kernel and aren't too difficult to find in a
big mail folder, if they are especially interesting.
In my opinion, if it's not big enough to need a list all to itself (new
fs, big fs/net/vm hacks) then linux-kernel is exactly the place for it.
The list might sometimes be hard to cope with, because there is lots of
discussion on it, but a lot of the discussion belongs there (and certainly
that which doesn't doesn't belong on your lists either).
It's a good list, and it works pretty well. I don't claim any authority
(which is why I'm prepared to state my opinions on the matter) but I
consider trying to "poach" valid traffic from linux-kernel very
antisocial.
Matthew.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/