Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Second patchset for LPC32xx device tree conversion
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: 2012-04-19 14:21:56
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: 2012-04-19 14:21:56
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Wednesday 18 April 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:00:39AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:quoted
1. develop on -rc 2. merge with latest -next, test and make sure it works there 3. submit for review against -rc 4. have patches included in -next once reviewed, but based on -rc 5. when merge window opens, have patches sent for upstream inclusionSteps 3 and 4 should be to submit against whatever branch is appropriate for the subsystem and driver - if people follow this process they're going to get bounced back by a fair proportion of maintainers, -rc isn't universally what people are looking for so people should be aware that they need to pay attention here. Generally I'd say the development version is a safer bet than -rc for most subsystems.
Right. The description above was mostly done for the lpc32xx case, which is going to get merged through the arm-soc tree and that doesn't have a single development branch but instead has lots of them. For subsystems that have just one branch, I agree that it makes sense to develop against that one. Also for arm-soc, it can make sense to base on one of the existing branches, but I prefer the default to be to base on the -rc release so I can mix and match incoming branches as needed. Arnd