> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-media-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-media- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Felipe Contreras > Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 8:43 AM > To: Nagarajan, Rajkumar > Cc: Laurent Pinchart; linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Hiremath, Vaibhav; > linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Alternative for defconfig > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Nagarajan, Rajkumar <x0133774@xxxxxx> > wrote: > > 1. What is the alternative way of submitting defconfig changes/files to > LO? I don't think defconfig changes are prohibited now. If I understand correctly, Linus just hates the fact that there is a big percentage of patches for defconfigs. Maybe he wants us to hold these, and better provide higher percentage of actual code changes. What about holding defconfig changes in a separate branch, and just send them for upstream once in a while, specially if there's a big quantity of them in the queue? IMHO, defconfigs are just meant to make us life easier, but changes to them should _never_ be a fix/solution to any problem, and therefore I understand that those aren't a priority over regressions. Regards, Sergio > > I don't think we have any alternative yet. > > -- > Felipe Contreras > -- > 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 -- 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
