-nice tree [was Re: [Swsusp-devel] Re: swsusp problems [was Re: Your opinion on the merge?]]
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Wed Mar 24 2004 - 19:32:12 EST
On Ät 25-03-04 07:56:14, Michael Frank wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:23:38 +0100, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >On Ät 25-03-04 06:46:12, Michael Frank wrote:
> >>On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 11:17:04 +0100, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >Yes, having -nice patch with bootsplashes, translated kernel messages,
> >and swsusp eye-candy would work for me.
> If a -nice _tree_ is useful, your guys just have to launch it. Gosh this
> could reduce
> arguments about what goes into the kernel and save Linus and Andrew lots of
> >Feel free to maintain it.
> Busy enough with testing, actually far too busy for being on a volunteer
> basis ;)
> I am sure that better qualified and properly supported/sponsored individuals
> will queue up as long as it is an _official_ -nice tree with the good
> of centralizing useful non-core functions :)
I'd say that having official -anything tree is an oxymoron (is -ac
tree official? is -mm tree official?), but yes, I hope someone picks
> >You see, 10 lines in printk is probably good enough reason not to
> >include that patch in kernel, because its "too ugly".
> Pretty does not count above, Ugly does not count here, Functionality always
> Besides that patch might be in the -nice tree.
Prettyness *does* count in -linus tree. -nice tree is likely to have
> >swsusp really should not have patch any code outside kernel/power.
> Which is extremely ideal, but one thing at the time...
Okay, lets not please add more of outside changes (for -linus merge).
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
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/