Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Devin, > I totally agree with you here. We obviously don't support developers who still > want to use a 2.4.x kernel on their computer, so a line as to be drawn at some > point. Currently, the backport starts on 2.6.16. I think it is ok to keep this as the basis version. > This being said, I think we should not base the v4l-dvb git tree on the very > latest Linus' tree. Linus himself stated during the LPC 2009 that subsystems > should not pull from his tree at random point, but should rather use main > kernel versions, or at least -rc versions. I think that basing the v4l-dvb > tree on top of the last tag from mainline would be a better practice than > pulling from it everyday. A good compromise here would be to use the latest main kernel version for fix patches that needs to go also to -stable and -rc1 for the other fixes and development patches. > This will obviously not solve the issue you mention, which is why we still > need to agree on a nice way to handle backports, but that will make life > easier for developers who want to try the v4l-dvb subsystem on top of the most > recent kernel. Agreed. Cheers, Mauro. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
