At Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:09:18 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 09:53:21PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > Are all these 2.6.30 material or for 2.6.29? > > They're a bit on the edge, I'd expect them to be safe for 2.6.29 but the > conservative thing would be to punt to 2.6.30. None of them are > critical. OK, I'll include them in the next 2.6.29 pull request, which will be sent today. > > For 2.6.30, I'll create another branch. It won't be included in > > linux-next, too, until rc1 is reached (Stephen requested so), but we > > can keep it in our main branch, of course. > > How about branching off a fixes branch for 2.6.29 rather than a -next > branch? That way we can keep using the same branch for further fixes > through the -rc series. Doesn't make much difference either way, > though. Usually I make a fix-branch off like "fix/asoc" after rc1 or rc2, i.e. the linux-next tree starts accepting the next-kernel stuff. Until then, topic/* will keep the 2.6.29 stuff. So my plan is to create next/asoc branch, switch to topic/asoc after the merge window, and use fix/asoc branch for further fixing. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
