at91 next tree

at91 next tree

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

Hi,

	I'd like to known how we could get the at91 at91-next branch pull
	in the next tree automaticaly?

	git://github.com/at91linux/linux-2.6-at91.git at91-next

Best Regards,
J.

Re: at91 next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2393 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:51:22 +0200 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
>
> 	I'd like to known how we could get the at91 at91-next branch pull
> 	in the next tree automaticaly?

You request it :-)

> 	git://github.com/at91linux/linux-2.6-at91.git at91-next

I have added that tree to linux-next.  It will be included in the next
release (probably April 27) unless someone objects.  I have cc'd the
other listed maintainers and Russell just in case.

I notice that there is currently nothing in that tree (relative to Linus'
tree).  This is not a problem for me, I mention it only in case something
is wrong at your end.

Currently I have listed only you (Jean-Christophe) as a contact in case I
have problems with the tree - if there are others that should be listed
as well, please let me know.

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 

You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
     * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
	Signed-off-by,
     * posted to the relevant mailing list,
     * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
     * successfully unit tested, and 
     * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.

Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell 
sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Legal Stuff:
By participating in linux-next, your subsystem tree contributions are
public and will be included in the linux-next trees.  You may be sent
e-mail messages indicating errors or other issues when the
patches/commits from your subsystem tree are merged and tested in
linux-next.  These messages may also be cross-posted to the linux-next
mailing list, the linux-kernel mailing list, etc.  The linux-next tree
project and IBM (my employer) make no warranties regarding the linux-next
project, the testing procedures, the results, the e-mails, etc.  If you
don't agree to these ground rules, let me know and I'll remove your tree
from participation in linux-next.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: at91 next tree

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 09:55 Sat 23 Apr     , Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:51:22 +0200 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > 	I'd like to known how we could get the at91 at91-next branch pull
> > 	in the next tree automaticaly?
> 
> You request it :-)
> 
> > 	git://github.com/at91linux/linux-2.6-at91.git at91-next
> 
> I have added that tree to linux-next.  It will be included in the next
> release (probably April 27) unless someone objects.  I have cc'd the
> other listed maintainers and Russell just in case.
> 
> I notice that there is currently nothing in that tree (relative to Linus'
> tree).  This is not a problem for me, I mention it only in case something
> is wrong at your end.
Normal I just prepare it
we have a at91-l2 where we prepare the next end then we merge it at91-next
I'm preparing the next this week-end
> 
> Currently I have listed only you (Jean-Christophe) as a contact in case I
> have problems with the tree - if there are others that should be listed
> as well, please let me know.
please put Nicolas too
Andrew do you want to be in Cc too?

Best Regards,
J.

Re: at91 next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 359 bytes --]

Hi,

On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 04:09:40 +0200 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
>
> please put Nicolas too

Done.

> Andrew do you want to be in Cc too?

Andrew's email seems to be bouncing, so I have not added it.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: at91 next tree

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 12:39 Sat 23 Apr     , Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 04:09:40 +0200 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > please put Nicolas too
> 
> Done.
> 
> > Andrew do you want to be in Cc too?
> 
> Andrew's email seems to be bouncing, so I have not added it.
Tks

Best Regards,
J.

Re: at91 next tree

[Nicolas Ferre]

Stephen,

Le 23/04/2011 01:55, Stephen Rothwell :
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:51:22 +0200 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> 	I'd like to known how we could get the at91 at91-next branch pull
>> 	in the next tree automaticaly?
> 
> You request it :-)
> 
>> 	git://github.com/at91linux/linux-2.6-at91.git at91-next
> 
> I have added that tree to linux-next.

Can you please move our at91-next branch that is included currently in
linux-next to the "2.6-less" github tree?

git://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91.git

(I hope that the merge conflicts that you have just resolved will not
suffer from this move: but as commits are the same, I am pretty sure
that it will be transparent).

Thanks for your help, best regards,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre

Re: at91 next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 587 bytes --]

Hi Nicolas,

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:14:19 +0200 Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
>
> Can you please move our at91-next branch that is included currently in
> linux-next to the "2.6-less" github tree?
> 
> git://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91.git

Done.

> (I hope that the merge conflicts that you have just resolved will not
> suffer from this move: but as commits are the same, I am pretty sure
> that it will be transparent).

It will be fine.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]