All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Murray Jensen <Murray.Jensen@cmst.csiro.au>
To: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: linuxppc_2_5 source tree (and others)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 12:31:04 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <18779.989548264@msa.cmst.csiro.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Message from Cort Dougan <cort@fsmlabs.com> of "Thu, 10 May 2001 17:11:14 CST." <20010510171114.C1595@ftsoj.fsmlabs.com>


On Thu, 10 May 2001 17:11:14 -0600, Cort Dougan <cort@fsmlabs.com> writes:
>Believe me, I know what it looks like.  I'm trying to clean things up but
>it's a large problem.  I do appreciate your criticisms though, they are
>useful in finding the worst parts.

And we appreciate your efforts - thank you.

>Perhaps I can clear things up a bit.  I wanted _2_4 stable so that it
>didn't get brand-new (untested and buggy) code.  I created _2_5 as a
>work-area for us so people could push changes there, test them internally
>and work out any problems.  We could then move them over to _2_4 quickly
>when the changes were stable.  Unfortunately, people started giving out the
>_2_5 tree and telling people to use it.
>
>So, to solve that problem I created _2_4_devel so that we could get outside
>testing and let users chose which kernel they wanted (brand-new features or
>very stable and tested).

This is fair enough. I just didn't know what was going on. I have joined the
linuxppc-commit mailing list so I should be better informed in future.

Just as an aside, might this mean that it would be easier to get bk write
access to the _2_4_devel tree? (slight smiley :-).

>Unfortunately we need multiple trees since branches won't do the job for
>us.  Lines of development will, though.  The people at BitMover and working
>on that feature of BitKeeper for us already.

Except it looks like you only get LODs if you pay. The free version won't
have LODs - and a number of other nifty features (as far as I can tell).

>When the real 2.5.0 comes out (when Linus creates it) I'll create another
>tree, linuxppc_2_5.  I made a mistake in naming our experimental tree
>linuxppc_2_5, this tree will be the real linuxppc_2_5.  We'll probably have
>a linuxppc_2_5 and linuxppc_2_5_devel but that's still to be decided (it
>will probably be decided by need).

I actually guessed this was what had happened when I checked on kernel.org
and saw that there wasn't an official linux 2.5 yet (just some pre release
patches).

>If the linuxppc_2_4_devel tree doesn't work for you let me know what
>trouble you're having and I'll try to help.

Thanks for your response - you have cleared the matter up as far as I am
concerned. I feel much better about it all now - I will probably switch to
the _2_4_devel tree. Cheers!
								Murray...
--
Murray Jensen, CSIRO Manufacturing Sci & Tech,         Phone: +61 3 9662 7763
Locked Bag No. 9, Preston, Vic, 3072, Australia.         Fax: +61 3 9662 7853
Internet: Murray.Jensen@cmst.csiro.au  (old address was mjj@mlb.dmt.csiro.au)


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

  reply	other threads:[~2001-05-11  2:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-05-10 18:40 linuxppc_2_5 source tree (and others) Albert D. Cahalan
2001-05-10 18:49 ` Tom Rini
2001-05-10 19:46   ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-05-10 19:57     ` Cort Dougan
2001-05-10 21:24       ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-05-10 23:11         ` Cort Dougan
2001-05-11  2:31           ` Murray Jensen [this message]
2001-05-11  3:14             ` Cort Dougan
2001-05-11  5:43               ` Murray Jensen
2001-05-10 21:44     ` Tom Rini
2001-05-13 19:33       ` Ira Weiny
2001-05-15  1:40         ` Cort Dougan
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-05-10  8:38 Murray Jensen
2001-05-10 16:10 ` Tom Rini
2001-05-10 16:24 ` Dan Malek
2001-05-10 19:33 ` Cort Dougan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=18779.989548264@msa.cmst.csiro.au \
    --to=murray.jensen@cmst.csiro.au \
    --cc=linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.