[i2c] Where do all the patches go?

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Nishanth,

On Fri, 04 May 2007 20:47:03 -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> Thanks for explaining the process. I hope we could put something up in
> the site on this.. ;) for lazy dumb blokes like me..

I prepared something:
http://khali.linux-fr.org/devel/linux-2.6/i2c.html

Comments welcome.

> Jean Delvare stated on 5/1/2007 10:56 AM:
> > I am building a new temporary git tree each time I need to send patches
> > to Linus, I delete it when Linus is done. The rest of the time, the i2c
>
> Am I right in saying that this is not public - something to see what is
> coming to the kernel?

As you found out by now: it is public. I am sending the pull requests
to Linus with Cc to the i2c and linux-kernel lists, so if you read
either list, you know when it happens. Anyway, the patches I send to
Linus that way are exactly the same patches that are available on my
website, so they are already public.

> > The user-space i2c tools are essentially independent from the kernel
> > version these days, so this shouldn't be a problem.
>
> One argument for a separate tree for lmsensor tools- esp with changes
> that can affect core - it makes sense for people to have a common area
> to develop and patch back with additional features.. :)... helps us all
> I hope..

I don't really understand what you mean here, sorry.

I've been thinking of splitting away the i2c tools to a separate
package, but then there's a problem with isadump, which isn't related
to i2c, but isn't specific to lm_sensors either. Having a separate
package just for isadump sounds overkill. And i2cdump and isadump share
some code (a small amount.) But maybe it'll happen; I wonder what
the others think.

For now the main objective is to remove all the kernel code from the
lm_sensors package and drop all the Linux 2.4 support.

-- 
Jean Delvare