From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: New release for DTC?
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 01:17:12 +0100
Message-ID: <20130615001712.D35FB3E0A2E@localhost>
References: <201208232015.39613.yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
 <51A79033.7080800@wwwdotorg.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <51A79033.7080800-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
Sender: "devicetree-discuss"
 <devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>, Jon Loeliger <jdl-CYoMK+44s/E@public.gmane.org>, David Gibson <david-xT8FGy+AXnRB3Ne2BGzF6laj5H9X9Tb+@public.gmane.org>
Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 30 May 2013 11:45:23 -0600, Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On 08/23/2012 12:15 PM, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > Hello All!
> > 
> > Following advice from Jon Loeliger, I would suggest that a new release
> > of DTC be tagged and packaged.
> > 
> > It is important for some projects to rely on a released version, rather
> > than use a random cset from the repository. Comes to mind, the automated
> > build-systems, such as buildroot.
> > 
> > Of course, I can help, if need be! ;-)
> > 
> > Are there any others who think that a release would make sense?
> 
> I'd love to see a new release. This would for example allow the U-Boot
> project to say "dtc vXXX is required to build the DT files contained in
> U-Boot", which might make agreeing on allowing the use of new dtc
> features in U-Boot easier. While this could simply be done by referring
> to a specific git commit ID, release versions or tags probably carry
> more weight. Tagging a release might also act as a specific trigger for
> distros to pick up and carry the new version.
> 
> Does it make sense to simply tag the current git HEAD as v1.4? If so,
> can we do this?

If a new release can be done in the next week or so, then I will use
that to update the in-kernel dtc version.

g.