This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCHv2 0/2] Tunables for glibc
- From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <sid at reserved-bit dot com>
- To: Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>, "Paul E. Murphy" <murphyp at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, munroesj at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 20:24:29 +0530
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/2] Tunables for glibc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160116185503 dot GA17754 at devel dot intra dot reserved-bit dot com> <CA+=Sn1k63+=qNriuR5J5POX4KQBocqsYePZNXzrpf9aSQY4g3w at mail dot gmail dot com> <20160512052321 dot GB5607 at devel dot intra dot reserved-bit dot com> <87eg97uywx dot fsf at totoro dot br dot ibm dot com>
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:35:42AM -0300, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho wrote:
> What about creating a top-tier branch  for tunables with the same policy
> as master?
> That way, whoever has time or new ideas can propose new patches, get community
> consensus under the assumption that's targeting specifically the tunables
> branch and push them.
> In the future, when we finally get a consensus on the whole framework, we can
> merge tunables into master.
> Right now, the only branch available is siddhesh/tunables which you're the
> only committer. Whoever has a new idea needs to update their patches whenever
> you update your branch.
That would force me to fix up everyones patches whenever I rework the
base patches, which I don't want to do.