On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 12:32:52PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:

On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 08:00:31PM +0000, Russell King wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 11:43:59AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 10:29:14AM -0800, David Brown wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Jan 30 2011, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

quoted

Hi David,

Today's linux-next merge of the msm tree got conflicts in
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x27.c, arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x30.c,
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-qsd8x50.c and arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c
between commit eda53d6d032effb653410b79e1b49e652a881744 ("ARM: P2V: avoid
initializers and assembly using PHYS_OFFSET") from the arm tree and
commit 07a3cc4814f790354d4c7be2c9dc6143a714a07a ("msm: Clean up useless
ifdefs") from the msm tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.

What is the best way to resolve this?  I can't really merge against
Russell's tree, since he may need to rebase his tree before the merge
window?

Public trees should never be rebased, so that shouldn't happen.

No.  I refuse to operate in a rigid environment.

My tree is made available on the basis that the 'devel' branch is
constantly remerged (sometimes many times a day) from the individual
topic branches; 'devel' is a convenient branch for sfr to pull into
linux-next, and for others to see what's in the tree.

merging is fine, right?

Not rebasing, you really don't want to do that.  Linus has been all over
that topic in the past, I doubt he wants to bring it up again in detail.

quoted

I am not permitted by people in the community to keep my development
work unpublished.

All the requirements from various different people are incompatible,
so I've chosen a way which satisfies the majority on the ARM community,
which is the community my tree serves.  It does not serve mainline
community interests.

So the goal of the ARM community isn't for the mainline community?  That
sounds like a big problem.

quoted

So I do not operate a "commit the patch and its fixed" policy except
for branches which people need to be fixed; they need to discuss their
requirements with me to achieve that.

I'm not telling you how to run your branches, other than the simple fact
of: "if it's public, it shouldn't be rebased".  See Linus's comments for
why this is.

I'm not going to get involved in an argument over this.  If people
insist on telling me not to publish then I'll do exactly that - I'll
make my tree hidden from public view.

My personal preference was not to publish, but my hand was forced.

I've added Nicolas so he can fight for having my tree visible in an
unstable form.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of: