On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 01:53:28PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > Daniel, > > On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 21:57 +0000, dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 08:10:13PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > > > This is not something I get to decide. Nevertheless, given that this > > > file shouldn't have been merged to begin with, I'd appreciate it if some > > > deadline could be agreed upon. > > > > I think I merged it actually, but there's no rules about what gets merged. How when what order, etc. > > It's all free form. > > There do not seem to be formal rules. But there surely are some > requirements for code to be added. One of the requirements is, I think, > that it should build. This file cannot be built: it is not wired into a > Makefile and it also includes, what appears to be, its own header file, > but that header is not part of the tree. The requirements are created by the maintainers.. In this case I would have expected support for this phone much sooner, and there are in fact patches on the list to support it which just haven't been merged yet. > Even the most dubious of code in drivers/staging is expected to "compile > properly"! But mach-msm isn't staging, different rules apply there. Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
