On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 11:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:33 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

quoted

We should at least -try- to follow the
process we've defined, don't you think ?

So you're saying -next should include whole new subsystems even though
its not clear they will be merged?

Maybe yes. And if there's some debate as to whether it should be merged
or not, maybe Linus should make the decision, let -next carry it for a
few days to iron out those problems, and -then- merge it.

That'll invariably create the opposite case where a tree doesn't get
pulled and breaks bits due to its absence.

-next does a great job of sorting the existing subsystem trees, but I
don't think its Stephens job to decide if things will get merged.

No, it's not, but then, maybe Linus could play the game and -tell- us
whether he intend to merge or not at least a few days in advance :-)

Therefore when things are in limbo (there was no definite ACK from Linus
on perf counters) both inclusion and exclusion from -next can lead to
trouble.

Well, Linus did ACK by merging :-) So he should have been able to give
that ack a few days in advance too..

Cheers,
Ben.