Subject: Re: linuxt-next: nfsd strange commit

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:55:29 -0400

On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 09:30:04AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:20:59 -0400 "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >
> > I've also been acting as a (somewhat inconsistent) locks.c maintainer.
> > 
> > Would it make it any easier if I kept a locks-next branch that you could
> > pull separately?  Or should I try to get that stuff into some other
> > tree?
> 
> A separate branch is possible, but if it is only one or two commits it is
> hardly worth it.  Lets see how it goes.

OK.

> However (I don't mean to pick on you, really :-)) your current tree has a
> merge that says "Merge branch 'for-2.6.29' into for-mm".  I (and Andrew)
> really don't want any 2.6.29 stuff in linux-next until after 2.6.28-rc1 -
> it just muddies the conflicts.  So can you remove that merge for now (its
> only a few days) and I will revert that merge in linux-next today.

Whoops.  OK, hopefully the current nfsd-next is more to your liking....

--b.