On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 05:19:45PM +0200, Dariush Pietrzak wrote: > > those bastards, doing a 1200+ patches and not > > keeping them up to date ... > The idea is that with patchset it's almost trivial to keep it up to date - > you've got your ctx16 patch from patchset that integrates nicely with the > rest of your kernel, ctx17 comes out, you make ctx16->ctx17 patch, and > you've got less work to do integrating.
hmm, depends, but for merely orthogonal patches this is definitely true, nonetheless some developer do not keep splitted patch sets, not only because the diff between versions of incorporated patches can also be applied to the whole patchdisaster ... do not get me wrong, I've stood up against monster mega patches several times, and personally I would prefer 10-100 line patches which can be easily reviewed/understood ... > > I guess this is the fate of almost every > > patch-combo starting as patchsets ... > Nope. The patchset is there, only that it's secret. > Me and few other people spent some time creating patchset with > newer stuff in ( and against 2.4.21 ), and when we wanted to > give it back, we heard 'yeah, but it doesen't integrate with > my secret sooper-dooper patchset so it's useless to me'. so why not start your own patch SET and give back your 'imporvements/updates' to the community? If people with a preference for split up patches (like you and me) are given the choice, they will choose the 'better' solution ... > Friggin' great. > ... i'll calm down now;) best, Herbert
