[plug] Kernel development process

[Jeremy Kerr]

Hi Andrew,

> Can someone explain to me why the kernel patch submission process
> still involves sending patch-sets via email, instead of just saying:
> "Here's a new feature that does <something...>. You can fetch it from
> <publicly accessible git repo/tag>, which is based on <upstream
> version>."

As well as the other good reasons given in this thread, the aspect of 
patch review is pretty important. If patches are sent to a list (rather 
than provided in a git repository), then there's a very low barrier for 
anyone on the list to review and comment on the patches. The emails are 
already in a format that makes it easy to reply and provide feedback, 
rather than having to clone a repo, and manually create replies.

You'll often see large changesets posted to the list as patches, but 
also include a git URL for easier merging.

Of all of the "procedures" of kernel development, thorough review is 
something we try to optimise for. The easier it is to review a proposed 
change, the better.

Cheers,


Jeremy