On Thursday 17 January 2013, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> So my strategy for v2 series (based off 3.8-rcx) is to introduce devicetree,
> multi-platform-image support (and other key fixes such as syscall restart
> issues)
> as slap-on patches on top of old code. This is not to avoid any chop-n-dice of
> fixing patches (I've done that in plenty between v1 and v2). Its just that, in
> absence of revision history for ARC port (in upstream later on) - it helps
> capture
> the evolution of some key features and also for the community it serves as a
> live
> documentation of bad designs and how they can be fixed.
>
> Is that a reasonable approach for new port which is non-bisectable anyways ?
>
Yes, I think that's fine. you should make that clear in the introductory
email though, as well as in the description of any patches that get
changed significantly by a later patch, to make sure people don't comment
on the same things again when you have already fixed them.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
