On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:36:19AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > I noticed that the for-next branch of the arm tree has been merged into > the at91 tree. My understanding (and Russell, please correct me if I am > wrong) is that the for-next branch is *not* stable and may be rebased. > This will cause all sorts of problems in linux-next in the future (and > also when Russell or the arm=soc guys merge the at91 tree into theirs). And has already been rebuilt (I won't use 'rebased' because that's really not what happens to it.) I've already re-explained this to Nicolas. It's equivalent to someone basing their work off linux-next and expecting to have that pulled into some other tree. What's even worse is that Nicolas has published this as an official branch for other people. > In fact, I am going to have problems today as Russell has already rebase > his for-next branch. :-( I suggest that you drop the at91 tree this time around if you get conflicts. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
