Re: maintaining DRM and using bitkeeper..

[Dave Airlie]

>
> Another thing you should realise is that flag-day patches are NOT welcome.
> The ongoing effort removing macors are better included in the kernel as 20
> small steps rather than 1 big patch.

This is my main issue with using bitkeeper vs separate patches, if I check
the macro conversion into bitkeeper as separate patches each removing a
couple of inter-related macros (this is my intention... it is what I did
in the DRM CVS tree) and I ask Linus to pull it from a tree, will it not
look like one big patch (albeit in a number of changesets...) - so the
patch itself will look like a flag day but the bk pull will look like a
set of patches... whereas without bk I send 20 patches to LK in 20 mails
they are nice and separated out ..

>
> May I ask why not?

well they are down the patch queue and will take me a bit of time to sort
out if the patches in front don't make it in ... though I might get to it
soon..

Dave.

-- 
David Airlie, Software Engineer
http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie
pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person

-
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/