From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: merge of the arm tree into the at91 tree
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:56:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F2274CA.7020809@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120127093619.f2c90c6aa8b542134a157956@canb.auug.org.au>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 01/26/2012 11:36 PM, Stephen Rothwell :
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed that the for-next branch of the arm tree has been merged
> into the at91 tree. My understanding (and Russell, please correct
> me if I am wrong) is that the for-next branch is *not* stable and
> may be rebased. This will cause all sorts of problems in
> linux-next in the future (and also when Russell or the arm=soc guys
> merge the at91 tree into theirs).
>
> In fact, I am going to have problems today as Russell has already
> rebase his for-next branch. :-(
>
> I assume that the merge was done to fix some conflicts or pick up
> some functionality that is in Russell's tree. This should be done
> by merging topic branch(es) of that tree that Russell has
> explicitly said are stable.
Yes, I was anticipating a stable branch from Russell and never should
have pushed into a branch that would have gone to linux-next: My
mistake, sorry.
Note that my intention was not to use this branch or one based on
rmk/for-next in any "pull request". It was just a hint for people that
wanted to work on at91 for 3.4...
So, Stephen, can I ask you to remove the at91-next branch from your
pull list. For the moment we can rely on arm-soc guys to experiment
our changes in linux-next. It may be simpler for everyone.
thanks for your understanding, best regards,
- --
Nicolas Ferre
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPInTFAAoJEAf03oE53VmQ01UIALIkAxoj3Oxou45+Ts0hjqCk
ddQpqXsoZt44B/b+M+b2wPKK+stmjAVXT8KQJporgckmJyatc/H3BOdaCw5a4rGR
PPrBjEZRx+cH6IXnzII2b73MkdvmKrICOlKpcuIlJiXPcpWet0J1K4lmMWxDPC2D
zGeTFMqqUYMOxxADtRZhsHo/ryZivtaZf9LfYS5pYc7u4vhqjkCt8q07NabgIRaL
GpfyXSLFl30Sqx53Di6DLr0OUUmHGPvjDj1xR3yqdeXtO9vpoiwZequlVX+PYboL
S6OUPYjrDy8uRTNNkz1X8erruOx/y0T87/l4SHt28Aoz9p9sobcykcyRqQyHGJw=
=YhKe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-27 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-26 22:36 linux-next: merge of the arm tree into the at91 tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-26 23:23 ` Russell King
2012-01-27 9:56 ` Nicolas Ferre [this message]
2012-01-29 21:06 ` Stephen Rothwell
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=4F2274CA.7020809@atmel.com \
--to=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=plagnioj@jcrosoft.com \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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.