2009/3/26 Werner Almesberger <[email protected]>: > Sven Rebhan wrote: >> However, I would like to ask you to create a new stable branch, >> tracking 2.6.29.y releases + openmoko patches until 2.6.30 is out. > > Hmm, how would that "stable" branch differ from what I've outlined ?
If I got you right, you want to track the linus/rmk/ben/whatsoever development branch. That's fine for development, but most users don't like the buggy -rc (or even inter -rc) states. For them, a second branch should track upstream 2.6.29.y stable releases and we should backport important changes to that branch. This would give them the opportunity to get importent Openmoko fixes while not fighting with unstable upstream -rc bugs. > I think the main question for selecting the ideal point is how > closely we have to exchange changes with that upstream branch (both > ways) and how much they get modified on their way to Linus. As I think we have to submit most of the stuff to linux-arm, we should track this branch. The changes we (who else should do them if the code is not upstream) make during the review process should be made in tracking tree. This way we keep in sync with upstream (at least for our stuff), don't we? Sven P.S.: Btw. good to see Openmoko kernel development rolling again... :-)
