On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 01:59:12PM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Hi, > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:58:45AM +0100, ext Gadiyar, Anand wrote: >> Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> From now on, please help us do a better job and only send _fixes_ during >>> the -rc cycle. I'll be accepting new code by -rc6 only. If you send new >>> code before that, I'll comment on the patch and delete it from my inbox. >>> >> >> Why can't we follow Greg's model and keep two queues - one with fixes >> for the current cycle, and one with features for the merge window? >> >> That way, we give people the ability to test the new features too. >> >> >> Also, if it's okay with you and Greg, I would prefer that there were >> only one USB queue - Greg can take the patches and add it to his series. >> >> That way, we don't need to track multiple trees. It shouldn't be much >> work now, as most of the MUSB code is in - so we can treat MUSB the same >> way the rest of the USB code is treated. > > If Greg is ok with it. I'm ok too. Although he would need us to filter out > what doesn't need to be applied. And that's actually what I've been doing > for him. Basically preparing the patches and (mostly recently) splitting > into fixes and new features. I'm ok with taking musb patches for the next kernel release, like I've been doing, but I would like them all to come through Felipe as I'm really tired of trying to pick through the conflicting patches that you all keep sending :) thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
