On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:02:26PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > John, Luis, > > > > I'm a little confused about which tree to use. I though we should base driver > > development on wireless-testing, but I see that you merge patches into > > wireless-next first. So should we re-base patches to wireless-next before we > > send them? > > Rule of thumb is if its large use linux-next, wireless-testing just > lets you actually boot a usable kernel. Actually, I generally prefer that patches target wireless-testing. In the even of conflicts between that and wireless-next-2.6, I can usually sort them out myself. If not, I'll ask. > > Also, AFAIK, compat-wireless is based on linux-next, so if I want to create a > > compat-wireless package based on my latest driver changes (I need to do this > > frequently for testing my driver on my platform), I always run into problems > > because my latest driver is in wireless-testing and not in linux-next. Do you > > have any advise on a proper workflow here? > > I have a "wl" branch for wireless-testing too :) the master branch is > for linux-next. Actually, there will almost never be anything in wireless-testing that isn't in linux-next. linux-next pulls from wireless-next-2.6, just as wireless-testing does. John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
