Re: devicetree repository separation/migration

[Ian Campbell <ijc-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 13:20 -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > One way to minimize the inconvenience is keep versioning and dev
> > cycles in sync with the kernel. We could also start doing things to
> > align the kernel workflow with how things will work when we do have a
> > separate repository.
> 
> I don't think aligning development cycles is what we want most here it
> might be useful for us in Linux but it'll make things difficult for
> other projects since they're not aware of our release cycles. The
> device tree bindings and DT contents in that repo should be "always
> stable", i.e. no merge window / rc concept. As soon as something goes
> in it's live, and from then out only fixes to the DTS files (or
> appending the binding).

I agree, but I also think it would be useful to draw the occasional line
in the sand and do e.g. monthly or quarterly tagged releases e.g. for
distros who want a tarball package to work off.

There's no reason for that to be tied to any other projects dev cycle
though.

Ian.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree-compiler" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html