On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 11:19:28AM -0800, Chris Wright wrote: > * Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Or do you want to do it the same way you do for every other branch? I > > don't want to special-case it in my code and I don't think users want > > to special-case it in their brains. Have separate interdiffs on the > > side, please, and then people can choose, but do it the standard way. > > > > Dear ${SUCKER}s, can we have a decision on this? My ketchup tool is > > broken for 2.6.11.2 and I don't want to cut a new release until a firm > > decision is made. Obviously I have a strong preference for all 2.6.x.y > > diffs being against 2.6.x, it means that .y can be treated the same as > > -rc, -bk, -mm, ... (and I already coded it that way when 2.6.8.1 came > > out). > > I agree with having the patch be against .x, with x.y -> x.y+1 interdiffs > available on the side. Greg, any issue with that?
No, I agree with that, and will not be hard to do at all (the release script already handles this just fine.) I've held off rediffing 2.6.11.2 so far, as I don't know where to put the x.y+1 interdiffs? kernel/v2.6/incr/ ? Any thoughts? thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/