From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Will Newton" Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-staging tree created Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:37:56 +0100 Message-ID: <87a5b0800806120437n23602ba5raae500f5bd3d179f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080610190540.GA25066@kroah.com> <87a5b0800806110345v77529fc8r591f2fb4c95b5bdf@mail.gmail.com> <20080611162639.GE22134@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.30]:56454 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751757AbYFLLh5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:37:57 -0400 Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 9so2181908ywe.1 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:37:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20080611162639.GE22134@kroah.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@linuxdriverproject.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell 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. > 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. > thanks, > > greg k-h >