Subject: Re: linux-next: ftrace tree build failure

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 21:22:42 +1100

Hi Ingo,

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 10:14:56 +0100 Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> this has been fixed already a few days ago (if you google for the build 
> failure string it will send you straight to the fix patch) - i just didnt 
> push it out to the -next branches yet during the hollidays. (did that now)

Thanks.

> Generally if you see a problem with our trees you can check whether an 
> issue is still present in tip/master:
> 
>   http://people.redhat.com/mingo/tip.git/README

I'll try to remember ...

[I wish you had stopped there]

> before duplicating fixing effort and reporting it as a genuine issue - 

It broke a linux-next build - just how genuine does an issue have to be?
Even if I knew you had already fixed it, I would still have reported it
(although saying where I got the fix from) so that others know why I have
had to apply a patch.

> especially in a busy timeframe like the merge window when the _next_ merge 
> window is the least of our worries.

During the merge window, linux-next is not concerned with the _next_
merge window (as my previous reminder to people spelt out), but very much
with the current merge window.  What you don't seem to realise is that
others use linux-next during the merge window to do integration testing
after fixing up their trees to cope with stuff that Linus has already
merged (in order - as much as possible - to not break Linus' tree).  So
when you break the linux-next tree, you make life harder for them.

So, how much of your time would have been "wasted" remembering to put
that fix into the linux-next branch compared to my time and the time of
others?

And don't bother responding (especially privately) I don't need the
aggravation.  If you feel a need to reply coming on, just delete this
email instead and pretend I didn't write it.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    [email-masked]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/