On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 12:40:44AM -0600, Otto Solares wrote: > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 04:54:59PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:22:43AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > > > Greg KH wrote: > > >> > > >> Bug fixes, not new features, it's pretty simple :) > > > > > > Just bug fixes, or does it have to be a regression? > > > > As I understand it, the rule is more like "bug fixes that are committed > > in the linux-2.6 tree". Since Linus has become more strict about > > requiring "regressions only" after the merge window, that effectively > > enforces the "regressions only" rule on the -stable trees as well. > > In this case that rule is harming, is not idiotic to not accept bug > fixes early or later?
I'm just the messenger...FWIW the argument is that even a "fix" can introduce a new "bug" somewhere else, often quite unexpectedly. John -- John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
