Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:31:27 -0700 | Subject | Re: ARM SoC tree, Was: Re: [PATCH 05/12] ARM: ixp4xx: use __iomem for MMIO | From | Olof Johansson <> |
| |
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote:
> It would be different if my tree included e.g. core ARM changes - but it > doesn't. What's the _real_ reason for asking me to push my changes > indirectly?
The reason is that when all ARM platform maintainers pushed code straight to Linus, no one was making sure that the code meets a quality bar and each vendor only focused on just their own stuff.
As an end result, over the years lots of crap got pushed straight to Linus, code that we have now spent about a year and a half doing massive cleanups and restructurings of. No vendors really talked to each other, all of them solved their own problems their own way without figuring out how to work better together and build infrastructure for their common requirements. Linus finally lost his patience with the massive churn of duplicated reinvented code and there was a huge blow up about it. See http://lwn.net/Articles/439326/ for background.
> Also, not that it's the most important, but how is it better for anyone > to delay changes - which are completely orthogonal to arm-soc - for > additional months? Doesn't "release early, release often" make sense > anymore?
Nothing is delayed by going through arm-soc. We're closing down our tree for new (large) pull requests around the same time where you should no longer add them to your -next branch either (-rc6/-rc7 time frame).
Small fixups, and of course bugfixes, are welcome closer to the merge window but the major chances should all have landed by then.
-Olof
| |