On Wednesday 05 December 2012 00:01:26 Antonio Quartulli wrote:
[...]
The big question is: Is this extra waiting time for new feature patches
really useful in the current situation and does batman-adv benefit from
it in a special/irreplaceable way?
the added value I see in having this
Hi Sven
I've been working on Marvell SoC chips for the last few months, mostly
those used in NAS devices. Maybe a few comments from a different
corner of the kernel may be useful. But this corner is also quite
different, so not everything i say bellow may be relevant for BATMAN.
We are about the
Hi Andrew,
I have a few comments on what you wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 11:35:27AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
Hi Sven
[...]
We don't have anything like a master tree.
Yeah, I think this is exactly Sven's point. In the end, the whole email from
Sven can be concentrated in the suggestion
Hi,
thanks a lot about this mail. I'll add some extra comments without any
judgements. Your mail mostly talks about other things which are orthogonal to
the anti-thesis
On Wednesday 05 December 2012 11:35:27 Andrew Lunn wrote:
I've been working on Marvell SoC chips for the last few months,
I think the major advantage here is that, whenever a person sends a
patch which is not going to work on older kernels, he must also send
a patch for compat.h/c.
Hi Antonio
This is where you are fighting again the kernel process. The kernel
process does not care about older kernels, expect for
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:24:35PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
I think the major advantage here is that, whenever a person sends a
patch which is not going to work on older kernels, he must also send
a patch for compat.h/c.
Hi Antonio
This is where you are fighting again the kernel
The biggest different is the lets install a whole kernel to test this
change
methodology ;)
Yes, i generally do that, test a whole kernel, not a module. But...
Usually (please correct me) batman-adv is developed outside the kernel
because
it is easier to test stuff and it worked till
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:39:27PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
The biggest different is the lets install a whole kernel to test this
change
methodology ;)
Yes, i generally do that, test a whole kernel, not a module. But...
Usually (please correct me) batman-adv is developed outside
On Thursday 06 December 2012 01:40:48 Marek Lindner wrote:
It would be even better if those who
believe to know how it all will work out stepped up and took the job of
collecting merging the patches into the new next. I certainly would not
mind.
I translate: Not with me.
Kind regards,
On Thursday 06 December 2012 01:40:48 Marek Lindner wrote:
[...]
I am a little confused here. Our next branch will be the new master and
the new master will be what maint is today ?
Ok, lets rename then:
* new_features (previously called next; in my first explanation called next)
* rc_work
Hi,
I am here to think loud about the batman-adv way of dealing with patches. I
think everybody knows how it works right now [1]. Patches will be accepted by
Marek and applied on master (we ignore some exceptions for now). From time to
time a new kernel is released, this is the time when next
Hello Sven, list,
Thank you for your effort in writing this email
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:50:08PM +0100, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
[...]
So, what happens when something gets rejected or has to be reworked? Yes,
some
people have to run around and do a lot of magic. These things will end up in
12 matches
Mail list logo
