From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:53:15 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Define upmconfig() for 834x systems In-Reply-To: <1157996270.5069.26.camel@saruman.qstreams.net> References: <20060908230548.5D170353AD0@atlas.denx.de> <1157996270.5069.26.camel@saruman.qstreams.net> Message-ID: <4505A28B.9010909@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Ben Warren wrote: > I understand your reluctance to accept code that's not used by any of > the eval boards and SBCs that are part of the distribution. There are > many reasons for taking this approach. I'm working on a patch for the ITX that includes this change, as Wolfgang requested, so it's no big deal. > A crazy idea that I'm sure has been shot down before, but have you ever > considered making an 'unstable' branch available? It could contain all > patches that pass the coding standards and perhaps a week of feedback. > If there was a big flashing sign that says "Use at your own risk", you > could offload the "RTFM" responses to others on the list, giving > yourself more time to move patches from unstable to stable. I think that's just going to make more work for Wolfgang and not solve any real problems. Patches aren't completely independent of each other - sooner or later he's going to get patches that apply to one tree but not the other. Anyone who's really interested in unapplied patches can scan the mailing list archives. -- Timur Tabi Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale