From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B33978CC for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk (mezzanine.sirena.org.uk [106.187.55.193]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40E3F1C4 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:10:34 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <20160715111034.GF30372@sirena.org.uk> References: <1468115770.2333.15.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <718BE1FD-6169-4205-A905-53F997D5943A@primarydata.com> <5785C80F.4030707@linaro.org> <20160713090739.GA18037@kroah.com> <20160713143447.GH9976@sirena.org.uk> <20160714031753.GA28722@kroah.com> <20160714100603.GJ9976@sirena.org.uk> <20160715002239.GA31603@kroah.com> <5788337F.8000500@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5788337F.8000500@roeck-us.net> Cc: James Bottomley , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] kernel unit testing List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 05:51:11PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 07/14/2016 05:22 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:06:03AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Ok, there's no need for everyone to use the same messy tree, but perhaps > > Linaro could participate with LTSI to help make something that more > > people can all use? No need to keep duplicating the same work... > > But this is way off-topic here, sorry. > Maybe a separate topic, and not entirely feasible for the kernel summit, > but it might be worthwhile figuring out why companies are or are not > using LTSI. My major problem with it was always that it is just a collection I do think that could be a useful topic to cover in stable discussions at KS, we've always focused on the stable trees but there's a much broader spectrum of work going on there. > of patches, not a kernel tree, meaning merges or cherry-picks are non-trivial. > Sure, one can create a kernel tree from it, but that is not the same. This is actually the main reason why I've never got around to pushing things back into LTSI (it has been a little while since I last did that admittedly). The effort involved in figuring out the tooling for LTSI always got in the way before anything productive came of it, having a directly usable git tree would be *so* much easier. --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXiMSpAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ12wH/1/RXwPh9Hn3sYhnVdzoPeJF vsUU47ulNAS/BZl232Fv/ommQ4ZcRs1MIFosl+vstiV8g3hP4cTxCThOlsTag4Kz RPO+5uS5g3+20b/xLv5+FTD6a6CNSHbfNr6muzlpGWkhd9slP5m/QHsmpG3kFAy9 WXfNnUkhaM5EHGrrmHFzBtgbJpEGVdZTI9ob4BI2U5m2oJXhm+jf6MnO1ieAH5Rm iEgjmJoiGrmsoVUXUug2dkYzJuyZkm9YDAUkyzKtfgtFwRHOMVrFlxGCa59nA2aJ 1zkp1AzMlsqv86OfpkvF0NsG9KyamDRT//kaGqA/r+fhpTrb4l/oCvYcigcGwbI= =Y9lQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK--