Re: [PATCH] trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/Altivec

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> Ok, based on consensus, I've applied this one too.

Btw, I don't think your process works. You never really gave people the
time to object. So for that reason you applied the first trivial raid6
thing, and it turned out to be wrong.

I think the patches need to have a rule like "they live outside the sucker 
tree for at least two days". And during that time, anybody can vote them 
down (which would move them to "unapplied" status, at which point somebody 
else might decide that for _their_ tree it's still the right thing to do).

And if at the end of two days, they still haven't gotten enough "yes"  
votes, they'd go into "limbo" status, with one extra grace-period (ie a
reminder on whatever list about a patch that is dying). And if it can't 
get enough "yeah, sure" votes even after that, it goes into the same 
"unapplied" list.

In other words, I think this really does want some automation. It
shouldn't be fully automated (at the very least, somebody needs to
actually check that things patch and fix up the changeset comments etc),
but the _rules_ should be automated. Otherwise they'll always be broken
because of "_this_ time it's obvious", which is against the point.

		Linus
-
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/