[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110526095919.GA31268@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 10:59:19 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM Subarchitecture group maintainership
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:33:55AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I think the question is about the existing -next branches people already
> > have - should they contain code that hasn't yet gone to you guys? We're
> > doing that for audio at the minute (having subtrees in -next directly)
> > and it's pretty helpful for miniising hassle for the maintainers of the
> > core tree.
> We obviously talk about arch/arm/[mach|plat]* stuff, drivers/ sound/
> etc. should go through the relevant maintainer trees.
Right, but the question is what to do with the subtrees that are in
-next currently. I'm mentioning sound as an example of a tree with
subtrees in -next directly.
--
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