From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: introduce OMAP MCOP board file Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 08:46:32 -0700 Message-ID: <20110405154632.GC17376@atomide.com> References: <1301995970-23699-1-git-send-email-balbi@ti.com> <20110405093656.GS2176@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20110405095119.GD4699@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:58357 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753709Ab1DEPqh (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:46:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110405095119.GD4699@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Felipe Balbi , Michael Fillinger , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux ARM Kernel Mailing List * Russell King - ARM Linux [110405 02:48]: > > I'd suggest holding fire on new stuff. > > We *absolutely* *must* show that we're taking Linus' complaint seriously > and make headway towards consolidating some of the code. I don't see that > activity as optional. I agree. > I've now made the decision (as I mentioned I may do in the thread) that > for the next merge window I'm only taking consolidations and bug fixes > through my tree, and I encourage everyone else to do the same. At the > moment, I'm planning for this up until the next merge window, but if > sufficient progress hasn't been done, I'll extend it thereafter. OK > In other words, no new platform code and no new platform class code. > > The longer it takes to get the consolidation effort producing results, the > longer we will have to keep the restriction in place, and the more painful > it'll be for people who want to have their platforms merged. > > So I hope *no* one is thinking "this isn't my problem, someone else will > solve it" - if you're thinking that then we're doomed. Yes we need more people to pitch in to the consolidation process, so everybody please help where possible. Regards, Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 08:46:32 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] arm: omap: introduce OMAP MCOP board file In-Reply-To: <20110405095119.GD4699@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1301995970-23699-1-git-send-email-balbi@ti.com> <20110405093656.GS2176@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20110405095119.GD4699@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20110405154632.GC17376@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Russell King - ARM Linux [110405 02:48]: > > I'd suggest holding fire on new stuff. > > We *absolutely* *must* show that we're taking Linus' complaint seriously > and make headway towards consolidating some of the code. I don't see that > activity as optional. I agree. > I've now made the decision (as I mentioned I may do in the thread) that > for the next merge window I'm only taking consolidations and bug fixes > through my tree, and I encourage everyone else to do the same. At the > moment, I'm planning for this up until the next merge window, but if > sufficient progress hasn't been done, I'll extend it thereafter. OK > In other words, no new platform code and no new platform class code. > > The longer it takes to get the consolidation effort producing results, the > longer we will have to keep the restriction in place, and the more painful > it'll be for people who want to have their platforms merged. > > So I hope *no* one is thinking "this isn't my problem, someone else will > solve it" - if you're thinking that then we're doomed. Yes we need more people to pitch in to the consolidation process, so everybody please help where possible. Regards, Tony