Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support

Tony Lindgren
2009-06-12T10:27:17Z

* Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> [090611 10:30]:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 07:00:39AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > You suggested pulling each set as they get reviewed into some omap branch
> > > in your tree, do you want to try that the next merge window?
> >
> > If we're following Alan's suggestion, then as I see it you're entirely
> > responsible for tracking what's in OMAP, getting it into linux-next and
> > (I guess) ultimately sending Linus a pull request for it during the
> > merge window. I just become someone who can put their oar into reviewing
> > OMAP patches as and when.
>
> I don't see things exactly that way.
>
> linux-next is a fully automated "let's dump everything together and see
> what is going to explode" kind of tree. There is no patch review except
> from those who see their code being dammaged by the blast. And it is
> automated in the sense that git pull operations are done automatically,
> even if someone deals with the merge conflicts manually afterwards. My
> tree can be pulled into linux-next directly or through your tree, or
> even through both paths in parallel and git will deal with it just fine.
> And at the end of the day the linux-next tree is tossed in the garbage
> bin anyway.
>
> I think that you, as the ARM maintainer, should continue gathering all
> the ARM subarchitectures into a coherent ARM tree and arbitrate
> conflicts when they occur. You should especially keep a tight control
> on the very core ARM code. But everything under arch/arm/mach-* you
> should let people maintaining those have control of that themselves and
> free yourself from that responsibility as much as possible. The current
> directory structure is quite indicative of where the boundaries are
> already. This way, if I make a mess of arch/arm/mach-orion5x/* then you
> just need to pass the blame straight to me.

This is what I was thinking too.

Tony