On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > So it is time IMHO that the description of how things *shall* work be > > itself revised. > > It *is* being revised, with an explicit explicit understanding that things > will have to change and a defined process for how to cope with that.
Good. Your previous emails seemed to imply that the lack of binding stability enforcement was the problem. And you said: "our defined processes for coping are based on the assumption that it (mistakes) should be rare". I think this statement is wrong. So if this is what's being revised then fine. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
