Thanks for the answer. So I guess it would be wise to bundle it when doing a backport there like r34084 was.
But there is no general rule or guideline when to backport (or which ones are mandatory). More an individual decision just made case by case? On Mo, 19.11.2012, 11:03, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On Sunday 18 November 2012 16:50:32 Alexander Stadler wrote: >> Nobody here to answer the rather simple question? (see below) > > I don't think these patches are important enough to trigger a kernel > rebuild > for all AA targets, but that is just my opinion. > >> >> On Sa, 10.11.2012, 19:15, Alexander Stadler wrote: >> > Can someone please answer what the criterias for backports into >> > attitude_adjustment are? >> > Jow just closes it as a ticket (https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/12355). >> > And no response here. >> > Thats not so great for collaboration. >> > In this case I ask because of r33686 and r33687 (r33887), see below. >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > Alex >> > >> > On Mi, 7.11.2012, 22:38, Alexander Stadler wrote: >> >> This and the following patch went into trunk r33686 and r33687 >> (r33887). >> >> What are the criterias for backports into attitude_adjustment? >> >> I'm asking because some make it into there directly and if this went >> >> upstream i thought its going to be a canditate soon. % _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
