From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (ch1ehsobe006.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.181.186]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B090E0140A for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail174-ch1-R.bigfish.com (10.43.68.225) by CH1EHSOBE004.bigfish.com (10.43.70.54) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:52 +0000 Received: from mail174-ch1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail174-ch1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AD5460082 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:70.37.183.190; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:mail.freescale.net; RD:none; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: 0 X-BigFish: VS0(zzdb82hzz1f42h1fc6h1ee6h1de0h1fdah1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ahzzz2dh2a8h668h839h947hd25he5bhf0ah1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh162dh1631h1758h1765h18e1h190ch1946h19b4h19c3h1ad9h1b0ah1155h) Received: from mail174-ch1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail174-ch1 (MessageSwitch) id 1365687229253331_12291; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CH1EHSMHS012.bigfish.com (snatpool2.int.messaging.microsoft.com [10.43.68.234]) by mail174-ch1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAEF2C0075 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.freescale.net (70.37.183.190) by CH1EHSMHS012.bigfish.com (10.43.70.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:43 +0000 Received: from az84smr01.freescale.net (10.64.34.197) by 039-SN1MMR1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net (10.84.1.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.328.11; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:42 +0000 Received: from [10.29.244.97] ([10.29.244.97]) by az84smr01.freescale.net (8.14.3/8.14.0) with ESMTP id r3BDXfQI026325 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:33:42 -0700 Message-ID: <5166BB8D.8010404@freescale.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:33:01 -0300 From: Daiane Angolini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" X-OriginatorOrg: freescale.com Subject: review / comments / merge protocol X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:33:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It was not the first time that one merge was considered "too fast", and that other one was considered "too slow". In fact, we do not have a protocol, so, it was not "too fast" or "too slow". I know protocol may be boring. But, I believe some formalism can avoid misunderstood. One week after meta-fsl-arm dylan announcement I will sent a protocol proposal. And I will give 2 weeks for voting and discussion. I believe we need at least 10 participants in the discussion for the protocol aproval. (do we have 10 active members in the ML?) If you disagree we need a protocol, it's time to say it. With no protocol, nothing can be considered "too slow" or "too fast" because there is no way to measure it. If you have any protocol idea, please, let me know. I will study the review/merge protocol used in kernel, u-boot and yoctoproject, and adapt it to our "reality". But if you have an "easier" protocol, it's time to say it. Regards, -- Daiane