On Tue, 28 Dec 2021, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote: > Hi Lee, > > > On Tue, 07 Dec 2021, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > > On 12/7/21 2:03 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > > > [ ... ] > > > > > It sounded to me like Lee wanted an immutable branch for that > > > > > > > > Not exactly, I said: > > > > > > > > "> Suppose we should take patch #2 via [Watchdog] as well. > > > > > > > > If that happens, I would like a PR to an immutable branch." > > > > > > > > The alternative is that I take the patch and provide an immutable > > > > branch to you, which I am in a position to do. > > > > > > > > > > I understand, only I am not in a position to take it since my tree > > > isn't the official watchdog-next tree, and it doesn't show up in -next. > > > If Wim takes it into the official watchdog-next tree or not would be > > > completely up to him. > > > > > > I personally don't care if the bindings check is clean in my inofficial > > > tree, so maybe this is a non-issue. > > > > That doesn't help, sadly. > > > > I think the best course of action is for Wim to let me know when this > > patch makes it into his tree. I'll take the MFD one at the same time > > and the two shall meet in -next. > > > > Honestly, this is all such a faff. > > > > Just to keep a script happy that 3 people care about. > > It's going in today. Also applied. Thanks Wim. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
