From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3D13359C.2030803@motorola.com> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 15:18:04 +0100 From: John Traill MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Mackerras Cc: Steven Scholz , Dan Malek , Wolfgang Denk , Tom Rini , LinuxPPC Subject: Re: board specific defines in commproc.h !?!? References: <20020619221532.F3C7A10301@denx.denx.de> <3D120573.4000305@embeddededge.com> <3D12F140.23BA447F@imc-berlin.de> <15635.12386.415897.593660@argo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Everyone/Anyone, Does this mean linuxppc_2_4_devel will disappear leaving a 2.4 stable tree and a 2.5 devel ? Paul Mackerras wrote: > Steven Scholz writes: > > >>I am not quite sure about the policies now. Could you please explain: >> >>linuxppc_2_4 is a stable tree >>linuxppc_2_4_devel is a devel tree >>linuxppc_2_5 is a devel tree >> >>Is that right? > > > 2_4_devel is stabilizing. Once 2.4.19 comes out the plan is to > restructure the linuxppc_2_4 tree along the lines of the 2_4_devel > tree and start moving the stuff from 2_4_devel into 2_4 and submit it > to Marcelo. > > With 2.5, I am hoping to be able to keep Linus' tree in closer sync > with our linuxppc-2.5 tree than we managed in the past with the 2_4 > trees. > > Paul. > -- Regards, John ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/