[PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINERS: add i2c tree for embedded platforms
From: Uwe Kleine-König <hidden>
Date: 2010-03-01 09:07:14
Also in:
linux-i2c
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:57:54PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:01:46PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:quoted
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K?nig <redacted> Acked-by: Jean Delvare <redacted> --- MAINTAINERS | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 2533fc4..a3c936c 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS@@ -2626,6 +2626,7 @@ M: "Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)" <ben-linux@fluff.org> L: linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org W: http://i2c.wiki.kernel.org/ T: quilt kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jdelvare/linux-2.6/jdelvare-i2c/ +T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.gitThis is wrong. This is the same tree which I pull ARM stuff from, so it needs qualifying with a branch name.
$(git ls-remote git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git) suggests two candidates: for-linus/i2c next-i2c And I think for now this is only parsed by humans and everbody should be able to notice that e.g. "next-s3c" doesn't contain i2c patches in the presence of the two above branches. So unless there is a syntax to specify more than one branch I suggest to keep it as is. Or should we only list next-i2c? Ben, what do you think? (Maybe we can just make it: T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git for-linus/i2c T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git next-i2c but this is a bit too much IMHO. (Who volunteers to list all branches of tip in MAINTAINERS? ;-)) Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |