On 01/12/2016 11:39 AM, Steven Munroe wrote: >> That's the rule. There are no other discussions to be had. >> > Well is was posted to to powerpc next: > https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/e708c24cd01ce80b1609d8bacc > > We have agreement between the kernel and GLIBC (and the ABI). > > The issue is just coordination across communities and individuals that > may not being paying attention to other communities dead lines. > > Have you ever tried to push a string, up hill. That is open source > development in nutshell. ;)
I know exactly what this is like. > So it is in flight and glibc is soft/slush freeze. I would hate to > revert this one day just to add it back to the next. Especially if those > days straddle the hard freeze ... > > So can we let this ride a day or too? Sure. I'm not an unreasonable person. My goal as a glibc steward is to remind IBM that our best practice is that we *wait* until it goes into mainline before committing to glibc master. There really isn't any reason to check this in to glibc master right now. It could wait. Adhemerval as a release manager is also not an unreasonable person. I have already discussed with Tulio that he should have just waited to commit these changes, but gotten an exception from Adhemerval to checkin the fairly low-risk patches late in the freeze. That's exactly the purpose of a release managers job, to grant you exceptions as we approach release, particularly when schedules don't quite line up. Cheers, Carlos. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev