[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:59:16 -0800
From: David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree
On Wed, Feb 02 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> The actual problem here is that some people, notably the msm folks, are
> bypassing the maintainer hierarchy and going straight to Linus for their
> pull requests instead of asking RMK to pull. We once debated this at
> some point and it was agreed that completely independent SOC specific
> code with no dependencies on the common ARM code _could_ go straight to
> Linus directly if they crave for it.
I also have no real problem sending pull requests to RMK instead of
Linus, as long as it isn't a pain. Linus gives clear directions as to
how his tree works, and when he expects what kinds of pull requests.
Weird web-based patch tracking systems are a pain. Pull requests from
git with a fairly easy way to know when they've been pulled are not.
I also find that http://ftp.arm.linux.org.uk/ is frequently
inaccessable, and usually slow.
As it stands, so far, it's been a lot less work for me to send directly
to Linus, and resolve the issues that come up when they do.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists