Hello Arnd,
[]
> > No, sorry for the confusion and not making this clear - I wrote the
> > original mail as a follow-up to "Android Code Review" session,
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-android/+spec/linaro-android-o-code-review
> >
> > http://summit.linaro.org/uds-o/meeting/linaro-a
On Saturday 21 May 2011, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2011 09:23:28 +0200
> Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> > 2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
> >
> > > I look at Gerrit from
> > > Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> > > use it in this scenario: it's what the up
Hello Linus,
On Sat, 21 May 2011 09:23:28 +0200
Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > I look at Gerrit from
> > Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> > use it in this scenario: it's what the upstream uses, so good it or
> > bad, if we want to
2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
> I look at Gerrit from
> Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> use it in this scenario: it's what the upstream uses, so good it or
> bad, if we want to work with upstrean, we'll need to eat Google's own
> dogfood.
True for any FOSS tha
On 19 May 2011 23:01, Michael Hope wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
>> Well, so bottom line of this, as far as I see it, is: Gerrit is de facto
>> tool for Android, and for Linaro Android we'd like to be sure that it
>> supports more flexible/advanced approach than
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Paul Sokolovsky
wrote:
> Hello Linus,
[snip]
> Well, so bottom line of this, as far as I see it, is: Gerrit is de facto
> tool for Android, and for Linaro Android we'd like to be sure that it
> supports more flexible/advanced approach than which is seen typically
>
Hello Linus,
On Wed, 18 May 2011 13:07:50 +0200
Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working
> > with multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> > against single (master) branch (as far as I under
2011/5/18 Patrik Ryd :
> On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> I think it basically boils down to the fact that a single
>> Gerrit branch is seen as "the place to integrate", whereas
>> in kernel terms, you should integrate a single topic
>> (such as "i2c updates", "boardfiles", "regulator
On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with
> > multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> > against single (master) branch (as far as I understood).
>
> It was mainly me
2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
> You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with
> multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> against single (master) branch (as far as I understood).
It was mainly me blathering about Gerrit in that session so don't
go afte
On 16 May 2011 17:52, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> Hello Arnd,
>
> I'd like to follow up to the discussion which took place during
> "Android Code Review" session at LDS
> (https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Specs/AndroidCodeReview).
>
> You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for
Hello Arnd,
I'd like to follow up to the discussion which took place during
"Android Code Review" session at LDS
(https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Specs/AndroidCodeReview).
You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with
multiple topic branches, in particular, that
12 matches
Mail list logo
