On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:51:14AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On 09/16/2010 08:02 PM, 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. > > I saw what looked like a nice series of patches from you four days ago > (power save, etc). But, they have not been applied to wireless-testing. > > Is there a tree that does contain these sorts of patches, or must > we manually apply them to our own trees if we want to try them out? You are just a bit unlucky in this case... I actually did have them in wireless-testing...on my machine. :-( I had a little merge/push hiccup that should be resolved now -- must have been in too much of a hurry for my day-off on Friday! Sorry for the inconvenience! 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
