From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] Pull request for u-boot-arm -> u-boot?
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 12:15:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5367D556.2050408@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5DURRCaAQEkgRLL0NgEGj1aFwWH5RTGZk5B-XZiJ3eYng@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/05/2014 11:59 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>> Albert,
>>
>> I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master ->
>> u-boot/master was likely to be?
>>
>> I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the
>> u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in
>> u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on the
>> earlier USB patches, and these should really go through
>> u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen,
>> u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in
>> u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those
>> patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge them.
>>
>> Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
>
> Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the
> kernel 'linux-next'?
Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the
combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with them.
However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A
needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be
*applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing
patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect
this issue at all.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-05 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-05 16:46 [U-Boot] Pull request for u-boot-arm -> u-boot? Stephen Warren
2014-05-05 17:46 ` Marek Vasut
2014-05-09 8:39 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2014-05-05 17:46 ` Tom Rini
2014-05-09 9:57 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2014-05-05 17:59 ` Fabio Estevam
2014-05-05 18:12 ` Otavio Salvador
2014-05-05 18:53 ` Marek Vasut
2014-05-05 18:15 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2014-05-05 18:40 ` Tom Rini
2014-05-05 18:52 ` Stephen Warren
2014-05-05 18:54 ` Marek Vasut
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5367D556.2050408@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox