From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Kleine-Budde Subject: Re: git-tree, NOW! Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:03:09 +0100 Message-ID: <4ED75EED.6010009@pengutronix.de> References: <48E9EDF6.4000009@pengutronix.de> <4ED6B460.2010508@pengutronix.de> <4ED7351E.2010907@grandegger.com> <4ED745F6.8030302@pengutronix.de> <4ED7494F.6080603@grandegger.com> <4ED74AC7.40605@pengutronix.de> <4ED75BD0.6070802@hartkopp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigEF475153A1B03197F92ABB3E" Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:59952 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751622Ab1LALDU (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 06:03:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4ED75BD0.6070802@hartkopp.net> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Oliver Hartkopp Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger , socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, "linux-can@vger.kernel.org" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigEF475153A1B03197F92ABB3E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/01/2011 11:49 AM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >>> Yes. So far we just tried to signal "patch is now ready" by adding ou= r >>> "acked-by"... which does not work for a series of patches, espcially = if >>> it touches other sub-systems as well (powerpc, devicetree). >> >> Yes - but David sometimes merges patches if they are not reviewed. Lik= e >> the pch-can driver, where I missed to reply to net-dev. > IMO if someone begins to post a new CAN driver on netdev we should pull= him to > linux-can for further discussion & review. Indeed the PCH driver mainli= ning +1 > was painful and IIRC it could still be merged to an other driver. Yep, but that's a different story :) [...] >>>>> That's also what Dave asks for. Apart from the tree he asks for som= eone >>>>> who acts as the one and only interface to him. >>>> >>>> Yes, technically that could/should be the git tree, in persona Wolfg= ang >>>> or/and (as Dave asked for one person) Oliver. >>> >>> Oliver? >> >> +1 > Well - i'm pretty happy that we splitted up the responsibilities some t= ime ago > and i'm currently only maintaining net/can. I'm working on this basical= ly in > my spare time and putting my eyes on all driver details too exceeds the= WAF ;-) No need to look at the driver stuff.... (continuation below) > Regarding net/can there's not much traffic & change. So it would be ok = for me > to stay on the current process on netdev-ML. >>>>>> I've setup a git repo on gitorious: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://gitorious.org/linux-can/linux-can >>>>>> >>>>>> It's based on net-next, and currently David's net-next/master is p= ushing >>>>>> there. It probably takes some time, the box pushing has just 4 mbi= t/s >>>>>> upstream. >>>>>> >>>>>> Comments? >>>>> >>>>> Apart from net-next, we may also need the net tree (as branch?). >>>> >>>> During merge windows David merges into his net-next tree, anyway I c= an >>>> setup linux-can and linux-can-next, based on the linux-net and >>>> linux-net-next trees. >>> >>> Do we need two trees? I thinks you can save a lot of bandwith (and di= sk >>> space) by using just one tree and two branches. >=20 >=20 > As the net tree only get's fixes i wonder why we should clone that tree= ? > Working directly on Dave's net-tree for fixes looks straight forward to= me. Thinking about it - yes, what about just keeping linux-can-next. > But the idea for a linux-can-next is great. >=20 > This would settle the process that we discuss new drivers & changes on > linux-can ML and finally commit the stuff in linux-can-next, where one = of us > can send a pull request to Dave. =2E..you send the pull request. > So everything beyond fixes would go this way then. +1 So we communicate to davem that we now have a git tree, and Oliver is the one that send the pull requests. Let's ask him if he wants to see the patches in the pull request. Marc --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de | --------------enigEF475153A1B03197F92ABB3E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7XXvQACgkQjTAFq1RaXHOXZACfQaxhA0lsu/IYLtzmphuIl5Ir L5oAoIT50vq8j/SxnVBjp+tSRLhh3eVl =xqbp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigEF475153A1B03197F92ABB3E--