2010/8/4 Ameya Palande <[email protected]>: > On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 13:20 +0200, ext Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> On 8/4/2010 4:13 AM, Ameya Palande wrote: >> > On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 13:07 +0200, ext Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> > >> >> On 8/4/2010 1:20 AM, Ameya Palande wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> Since config-generic modifications might change things in ARM and x86 >> >>> platforms, can we have a policy here to send config-generic changes to >> >>> meego-dev mailing list for review before committing? >> >>> >> >>> >> >> everyone except the package maintainers are expected to do that yes. >> >> >> > I want to see everyone *including package maintainers*. Is there an >> > issue there? >> > >> >> yes. >> >> we get configuration options added about twice a week. >> >> if I would have to wait some period (like 24h) each time I add the "# >> CONFIG_FOO is not set" for those to the end of config-generic, I lose 24 >> hours of work. >> that's just not practical. Sorry. > > Sorry but then we need to change the current process ;) > > Skipping review check for what goes inside config-generic is not > acceptable since it is also used by ARM. >
Isn't it feasible to say that any changes of this nature should be reviewed Adding a CONFIG_FOO=y/m Deleting a CONFIG_FOO=y/m Changes of nature # CONFIG_FOO is not set -> CONFIG_FOO=y/m Changes of nature CONFIG_FOO=y/m -> # CONFIG_FOO is not set Adding a # CONFIG_FOO is not set on it's own is not harmful to any downstream configs. Best regards, Carsten Munk _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
