i2c cvs repository status
khali at linux-fr.org
Sat Dec 20 17:35:38 CET 2003
> I understand.
> I didn't expect it to be included in the 2.4 patch;
> you're working off of the 2.8.2 release, right?
Not really. I am working off of CVS since 2.8.0. It was useful because I
sometimes need to make a few adjustments to CVS so that the patches I
send look better. Now I'll have to change the way I work. I'll keep my
local copy of the CVS apart and won't update it, still I will commit my
changes to the CVS. Hopefully there won't be too many conflicts, or this
method will fail badly.
> The 'big idea' is to get some testing of the patch
> in the 2.4 world, then submit a 2.6 version of the patch to Greg.
> The patch came in to us against 2.4 so it's much easier
> to do it this way.
Isn't it strange to use 2.4 for testing? I wouldn't think people will
write drivers needing new protocols for the 2.4 kernel. New drivers
should go to 2.6.
Once Linux 2.7 starts its life, I'll invite you to move any development
effort there, and keep the 2.4 CVS repository for bugfixes only. Idealy
the CVS repository would even disappear and the bugfixes committed to
2.4 itself, but since it's unlikely that all of the CVS will be merged
into 2.4, I guess we'll have to keep the repository forever.
More information about the lm-sensors