On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:50:31 +0000, Ian Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 13:23 -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Feb 19, 2014, at 11:32 AM, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:47:56AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > > >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Jason Cooper <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> I think we have two options: > > >> > > >> 1. Bring out everything in the current kernel repo to a separate one, > > >> but do it my mirroring over. Changes go into the kernel repo first and > > >> then comes over to this one, but other projects can mirror the > > >> standalone repo without downloading a whole kernel tree. > > > > > > I prefer this one. Assuming that a separate repo is mostly agreed upon, > > > this allows us to provide the tree in an easily digestible way without > > > impacting the current workflow. > > > > > > Also, if it works for the other projects, no one says we have to move > > > beyond this step. > > > > I just joined this list... What's the scope of what would move into the new > > repo? The dts files with the binding docs, or also the code to implement > > those bindings? > > Just the dts(i) and Bindings docs, not the code. > > e.g. something like > http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=people/ianc/device-tree-rebasing.git > would be the ultimate goal. And schemas files when we have them. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree-spec" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
