All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, ben-linux@fluff.org,
	'Olof Johansson' <olof@lixom.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Samsung devel for v3.3
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:19:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201201111619.05650.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120110223712.GL7164@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>

On Tuesday 10 January 2012, Mark Brown wrote:

> I do also wonder if it's worth letting people push stuff to you
> more aggressively - right now you seem to be asking people to batch
> things up and I wonder if that's making it a it easier for things to end
> up dropping on the floor if a time based routine isn't working well for
> people.

I really wish people would push stuff into arm-soc more aggressively,
and I certainly didn't want to give the impression that maintainers
should let their stuff sit in linux-next before sending it to us.

It's absolutely fine to send multiple updates per branch for arm-soc
as stuff comes in, as long as we can keep track of the dependencies
and we don't have to rebase the stuff that's already merged.

I would also prefer if people stopped having their own trees included
in next, but I know that I'm sometimes slow to pick up patches that
were submitted to arm-soc and that it helps people if they can get
earlier integration testing that way. Hopefully we're also getting
better at dealing with pull requests quickly so that there is no
need for the other tree in linux-next any more.

	Arnd

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] Samsung devel for v3.3
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:19:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201201111619.05650.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120110223712.GL7164@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>

On Tuesday 10 January 2012, Mark Brown wrote:

> I do also wonder if it's worth letting people push stuff to you
> more aggressively - right now you seem to be asking people to batch
> things up and I wonder if that's making it a it easier for things to end
> up dropping on the floor if a time based routine isn't working well for
> people.

I really wish people would push stuff into arm-soc more aggressively,
and I certainly didn't want to give the impression that maintainers
should let their stuff sit in linux-next before sending it to us.

It's absolutely fine to send multiple updates per branch for arm-soc
as stuff comes in, as long as we can keep track of the dependencies
and we don't have to rebase the stuff that's already merged.

I would also prefer if people stopped having their own trees included
in next, but I know that I'm sometimes slow to pick up patches that
were submitted to arm-soc and that it helps people if they can get
earlier integration testing that way. Hopefully we're also getting
better at dealing with pull requests quickly so that there is no
need for the other tree in linux-next any more.

	Arnd

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-01-11 16:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-03 23:33 [GIT PULL] Samsung devel for v3.3 Kukjin Kim
2012-01-03 23:33 ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-06 21:58 ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-06 21:58   ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-07 10:09   ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-07 10:09     ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-08 20:49   ` Mark Brown
2012-01-08 20:49     ` Mark Brown
2012-01-09  1:21     ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-09  1:21       ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-09  1:40       ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-09  1:40         ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-09  2:03         ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-09  2:03           ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-09 15:56         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-09 15:56           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-09 16:11           ` Mark Brown
2012-01-09 16:11             ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10  9:06             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-10  9:06               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-10 18:31               ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 18:31                 ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 18:44                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-01-10 18:44                   ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-01-10 18:46                   ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 18:46                     ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 19:00                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-01-10 19:00                       ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-01-10 20:13                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-10 20:13                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-10 22:37                       ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 22:37                         ` Mark Brown
2012-01-11  0:11                         ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-11  0:11                           ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-11  6:39                           ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-11  6:39                             ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-11 16:19                         ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2012-01-11 16:19                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-01-11 16:50                           ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-11 16:50                             ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-11 17:29                             ` Mark Brown
2012-01-11 17:29                               ` Mark Brown
2012-01-11  6:20               ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-11  6:20                 ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-09  8:26       ` Mark Brown
2012-01-09  8:26         ` Mark Brown
2012-01-17  6:40         ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-17  6:40           ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-17  7:23           ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-17  7:23             ` Kukjin Kim
2012-01-17  7:24             ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-17  7:24               ` Olof Johansson
2012-01-17 10:53           ` Mark Brown
2012-01-17 10:53             ` Mark Brown
2012-01-09  9:58     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-09  9:58       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-01-09 23:24       ` Mark Brown
2012-01-09 23:24         ` Mark Brown

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=201201111619.05650.arnd@arndb.de \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
    --cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=nico@fluxnic.net \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    /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.