> Currently the way I see it [should be] currently is:
>
> [cut-n-pasted graph]
>
> I.E. Linus just gets input from the combiners which
> test logic from the maintainers in combination. Also
> random hackers should input to the combiners and not Linus
> if there isn't an appropriate maintainer for their code.
Quite descriptive and useful, thanks.
Let me raise a point. And extend your graph:
random hackers
| | | | | | |
| maintainers -< subsys testers
| | | |
combiners -< tree testers
| |
Linus
Who you call combiners... How many of them should release independent trees
to be thrown at us test-dogs? My point of view is neither the hacker, nor the
maintainer nor the combiner one. Nor Linus, thank god! :) It's the guy who
risks his filesystem integrity with some 2.X.Y-preZ-testW-QQ-KK kernel.
How many crosspatched sources I should look at, to try my luck with?
Have fun,
-- Francesco
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/