On Thursday 17 January 2013, Vineet Gupta wrote: > So my strategy for v2 series (based off 3.8-rcx) is to introduce devicetree, > multi-platform-image support (and other key fixes such as syscall restart issues) > as slap-on patches on top of old code. This is not to avoid any chop-n-dice of > fixing patches (I've done that in plenty between v1 and v2). Its just that, in > absence of revision history for ARC port (in upstream later on) - it helps capture > the evolution of some key features and also for the community it serves as a live > documentation of bad designs and how they can be fixed. > > Is that a reasonable approach for new port which is non-bisectable anyways ? > Yes, I think that's fine. you should make that clear in the introductory email though, as well as in the description of any patches that get changed significantly by a later patch, to make sure people don't comment on the same things again when you have already fixed them. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
