On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:37:56PM +0100, Will Newton wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:45:55AM +0100, Will Newton wrote: > >> > >> Would the linux-staging tree be an appropriate place to merge a new > >> architecture? Or would that be too large a change and should go via > >> its own tree? > > > > That is probably too big to go into -staging and should deserve its own > > tree based on the size of patches that have gone into creating a new > > architecture in the past. > > Our tree is about 26000 lines of diff, including a few drivers. That's pretty sizable, I think it deserves its own tree. > > Do you have an example of one that is currently not included in the main > > kernel tree right now? > > I have a tree that is currently about half way to public consumption, > although I don't think there's any point pushing it until we have a > publically available toolchain. Yeah, that would help as well :) thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
