On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 10:53 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On 5 August 2013 10:44, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) tixy@linaro.org wrote: On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 17:13 +0800, Andy Green wrote: > The whole list is good things to have I just wonder how ongoing > updates will be handled for backport. For example at some point > "Tweaks to the MCPM code which aren't upstream." will go upstream and > probably be a bit different by then, someone should "revert" (it may > not be that clean since other patches may have meddled) the old one in > lsk and "replace" with the upstream patches. Mark's watching out for > that, or you are for the trees you merged that went into LSK, or > what's the plan? Plan? There's no plan that I know of.
As was mentioned on linaro-kernel the plan is that you should be sending me incremental updates as needed.
But who decides what's needed? If what is in 3.10 works, why backport a different version? And I hadn't planned on spending any time on backporting new versions or fixes.