On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jason Cooper [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 02:11:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Olof Johansson [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

One problem that needs to be solved is obviously how a binding
graduates from tentative to locked. This work isn't going to be very
interesting to most people, I suspect. Think standards committee type
work.

I think a time based stabilization period would be better than a
separate directory to apply bindings too. Or time plus periodic review
perhaps.

The only problem with a time-based versus separate directory is how do
users who've downloaded the tree determine which bindings are stable?
If they pull a tarball, or receive an SDK, there is most likely no git
history attached.

Well, if time based includes moving the binding out of the kernel,
then that is what defines it as stable or not. I guess that is a form
of a separate directory. I don't think we want to be moving bindings
twice: tentative -> stable and kernel -> DT repo.

The policy could be as simple as an binding without change in at least
N kernel releases is moved out and stable.

Rob