From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: Stable I2C branch needed as a dependency for Tegra change Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 22:21:59 -0600 Message-ID: <4FAF36E7.1070104@wwwdotorg.org> References: <4FA31297.8000904@wwwdotorg.org> <20120512184515.GC28973@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120512184515.GC28973-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: "linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , ARM kernel mailing list List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On 05/12/2012 12:45 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hi, > >> Is your i2c-embedded/for-next branch stable (i.e. that commit >> will not be rebased between now and when you send a pull request >> for 3.5), so I can use it as a baseline for a Tegra branch? If >> not, could you let me know when it is stable, so I can create the >> Tegra branch as that time. > > Because of my holidays coming along, I'd think my for-next branch > is done now (except for additions maybe). Yet, when and how to > rewind the branch and/or offering a stable base in general is > another thing I need to scratch my head about afterwards. No worries then; I'll hold the dependent patch until 3.6; that way there won't be any specific dependencies.