Re: devicetree repository separation/migration

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Olof Johansson [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

One way to minimize the inconvenience is keep versioning and dev
cycles in sync with the kernel. We could also start doing things to
align the kernel workflow with how things will work when we do have a
separate repository.

I don't think aligning development cycles is what we want most here it
might be useful for us in Linux but it'll make things difficult for
other projects since they're not aware of our release cycles. The
device tree bindings and DT contents in that repo should be "always
stable", i.e. no merge window / rc concept. As soon as something goes
in it's live, and from then out only fixes to the DTS files (or
appending the binding).

I agree we wouldn't really want or need to follow rc's and master
always being stable should be the target, but people will want
"releases." There is no reason you can't support both. Take dtc as an
example, the release process is someone requests Jon to make a release
because they want some feature not in a tagged release, so he tags
master and we have a "release." So we can either make something up for
versions and cadence, follow the kernel, or do both. I would view
syncing with kernel versions to be only for a transition period to
ease the concerns of those who are keeping their dtb version aligned
to kernel version.

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree-compiler" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html