From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mundt Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 16:26:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Changes in the SH and Genesis/R-Mobile git trees Message-Id: <20101109162633.GC22740@linux-sh.org> List-Id: References: <20101109083518.GA21086@linux-sh.org> In-Reply-To: <20101109083518.GA21086@linux-sh.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 02:09:50AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +0900 Paul Mundt wrote: > > rmobile-fixes-for-linus / sh-fixes-for-linus > > - These are my pull branches for upstream. They will always > > contain that which is bound for the next -rc, regardless of > > whether we are in a merge window or late in an -rc series. They > > will only be advanced as new things come in that need to be > > merged in to the next -rc, and may very well stay put for > > awhile if I've just completed a merge and all of the new > > patches are aimed at the next kernel. > > Should I include these branches among my other "current" trees? These > trees contain fixes for Linus' current -rc series and are merged very > early in linux-next. They are in linux-next so that bugs already fixed > are not reported again against linux-next before Linus has merged the > fixes. > Oh, I hadn't even noticed those. Yes, it seems like these would be a good fit for that. I haven't had a strict rule on rebasing for these in the past simply because there was no immediate downstream, but I can probably avoid that. > I will replace the sh and genesis trees in linux-next with the above two > branches starting with next-20101110 (and rename genesis to rmobile). > Great, thanks.