From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-staging tree created Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:54:41 -0700 Message-ID: <20080612235441.GC4792@kroah.com> References: <20080610190540.GA25066@kroah.com> <87a5b0800806110345v77529fc8r591f2fb4c95b5bdf@mail.gmail.com> <20080611162639.GE22134@kroah.com> <87a5b0800806120437n23602ba5raae500f5bd3d179f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:49278 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754800AbYFMACG (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:02:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a5b0800806120437n23602ba5raae500f5bd3d179f@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Will Newton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@linuxdriverproject.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:37:56PM +0100, Will Newton wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:45:55AM +0100, Will Newton wrote: > >> > >> Would the linux-staging tree be an appropriate place to merge a new > >> architecture? Or would that be too large a change and should go via > >> its own tree? > > > > That is probably too big to go into -staging and should deserve its own > > tree based on the size of patches that have gone into creating a new > > architecture in the past. > > Our tree is about 26000 lines of diff, including a few drivers. That's pretty sizable, I think it deserves its own tree. > > Do you have an example of one that is currently not included in the main > > kernel tree right now? > > I have a tree that is currently about half way to public consumption, > although I don't think there's any point pushing it until we have a > publically available toolchain. Yeah, that would help as well :) thanks, greg k-h