RE: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support

H Hartley Sweeten
2009-06-11T21:40:21Z

On Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:23 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> That works okay for the more popular sub-architectures like pxa, etc,
> where there are a lot of people to review code and sort out issues
> between themselves. However, for the architecture I do most of my work
> on, ep93xx, there are basically two of us, Hartley and myself, doing
> active work.
>
> It seems a bit dodgy if all the patches to ep93xx are written by one of
> us and acked by the other with no input from anybody else. It would be
> very easy for the ep93xx code to become and complete mess, and lack any
> coherency with the other sub-archs. I prefer having Russell, or somebody
> else, at least have a glance at the patches before they get applied.

I agree with Ryan.

I review everything Ryan (or others) submit for ep93xx and add my Sign-off-by
or Tested-by as appropriate, I don't think I have every actually added an
Acked-by to any patch (I could be wrong). Ryan does similar for my patches.

Before anything actually gets applied I am much more comfortable with an ok
from Russell and then going through his patch system. The third party makes
sure that we don't do anything silly (or stupid).

Regards,
Hartley