On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 13:20 -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > One way to minimize the inconvenience is keep versioning and dev > > cycles in sync with the kernel. We could also start doing things to > > align the kernel workflow with how things will work when we do have a > > separate repository. > > I don't think aligning development cycles is what we want most here it > might be useful for us in Linux but it'll make things difficult for > other projects since they're not aware of our release cycles. The > device tree bindings and DT contents in that repo should be "always > stable", i.e. no merge window / rc concept. As soon as something goes > in it's live, and from then out only fixes to the DTS files (or > appending the binding). I agree, but I also think it would be useful to draw the occasional line in the sand and do e.g. monthly or quarterly tagged releases e.g. for distros who want a tarball package to work off. There's no reason for that to be tied to any other projects dev cycle though. Ian. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
