Sebastian Haas wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger schrieb: >> Sebastian Haas wrote: >>> Marc Kleine-Budde schrieb: >>>>>>> "static struct sk_buff *". Patches are welcome. >>>>>> fixed. patches against which tree? >>>>> First again SVN trunk. >>>> What about a git tree? The whole svn situation suxs. >> What should be in the git repository? Wht do you expect? Maintaining a >> repository is real work, which I would like to minimize. Volunteers are >> always welcome, of course. > Here I am. Would be glad to support Socket CAN in this way.
I will keep in mind. >>> Full ack. Submitting a patch with git is just a matter of seconds while >>> with svn it takes minutes to copy and paste everything together in >>> Thunderbird. >> That's not a real pro for using a git ;-). Will comment in more detail >> tomorrow. > Yes, I know. For externals with write permission to git is a great > pleasure. You can work on a feature, check in your changes and simply > create patches. You can checkout Dave's net-next-2.6 branch. What are you missing? I see three options here: 1. Setup can-next-2.6 to ease the maintenance of David Miller. I would apply *accepted* patches to this branch and tell Dave from time to time to pull from it. There is little benefit for normal users. 2. Setup a full can-2.6 git tree with *all* drivers from the SVN repository (excluding the old ones). That's a significant maintenance effort, especially to provide compatibility with older versions. 3. Move the out-of-tree code from the BerliOS SVN repository to git. That's a valuable option, indeed. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
