From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B4C686F9 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:42:30 +1100 (EST) From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <20051109213837.47c8dce7.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20051109072228.GA7983@pb15.lixom.net> <1131526855.24637.67.camel@gaston> <20051109213837.47c8dce7.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:40:24 +1100 Message-Id: <1131601224.24637.155.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc: add support for new powerbooks List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > I don't think I'm adding much value handling ppc/ppc64 patches, really. > I'd prefer to get out of that business. > > It would be better to have an arch maintainer who runs a git tree, same as > ia64, arm, etc. > > And, given the amount of shared infrastructure, I suspect it would have to > be a single git tree for both architectures. > > I'd still sweep up random ppc patches, but those will go into mainline via the > originator->mm->git-powerpc->linus route. > > Possible? Well, I'm personally no fan of the git route as it causes us to have less review on the list imho (too easy also for me to just bounce a patch to paulus to shove in his git tree :) though that's what I've been doing for the last few days at least. But if you prefer that way, yes, it's certainly possible. Ben.