On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 03:57:54PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:01:46PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 2533fc4..a3c936c 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -2626,6 +2626,7 @@ M: "Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)"
> > <[email protected]>
> > L: [email protected]
> > W: http://i2c.wiki.kernel.org/
> > T: quilt
> > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jdelvare/linux-2.6/jdelvare-i2c/
> > +T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git
>
> This is wrong. This is the same tree which I pull ARM stuff from, so it
> needs qualifying with a branch name.
$(git ls-remote git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git) suggests two
candidates:
for-linus/i2c
next-i2c
And I think for now this is only parsed by humans and everbody should be
able to notice that e.g. "next-s3c" doesn't contain i2c patches in the
presence of the two above branches.
So unless there is a syntax to specify more than one branch I suggest to
keep it as is. Or should we only list next-i2c? Ben, what do you
think?
(Maybe we can just make it:
T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git for-linus/i2c
T: git git://git.fluff.org/bjdooks/linux.git next-i2c
but this is a bit too much IMHO. (Who volunteers to list all branches
of tip in MAINTAINERS? ;-))
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
