On 10/05/2011 07:38 PM, Asac said:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Andy Green <andy.green@linaro.org mailto:andy.green@linaro.org> wrote:
One thing that isn't entirely clear from what you describe is whether we would do the forward porting for new linus HEAD versions on our own or if we would wait until we get a first androidization from either google or our members? You're right it's a good question. What I have in mind is not to leave the patchset as the current pile of semi-history patches all intermingled but impose topic-branch ordering on them. So for example, I was quite surprised to see so many patches on net core subsystem, lots on net / wireless subsystem too all through the series. It would be interesting to re-order the patches so we had all the net core stuff in one layer, wireless-related stuff in another layer all together and so on, same way tilt-tracking is composed. We don't have to get OCD about it and do everything, we can have a topic at the end with stuff contaminated from all directions and leave it like it is for now. But I guess most patches will go into a topic if it is ordered correctly.Thats an interesting idea. We should not miss the opportunity to discuss the idea of reordering the patches with AOSP to see if they would be willing to take/collaborate on such an effort. Can you kick off such discussion on AOSP mailing lists?
Sure I'll propose it cc-ing linaro-dev and -kernel.
It's two separate issues for these guys if they want to have a fulltime tracking kernel to get away from "the -rc7 blues" they must suffer from at the moment, and if refactoring the patchset is helpful for them or not.
OK good. It's set up but we seem to have build issues; guess android team will fix that later today: https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/tracking-panda/.
No worries, I appreciate it's on its way.
-Andy