From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:20:26 +0200 From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" To: Mark Brown Message-ID: <20160922052026.GA13043@kroah.com> References: <57C78BE9.30009@linaro.org> <20160902191637.GC6323@sasha-lappy> <20160903000518.GN3950@sirena.org.uk> <1656524.OIRTMDr3jV@avalon> <57E22F8E.1040801@linaro.org> <20160921092341.GA25038@kroah.com> <20160921182204.GD7994@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160921182204.GD7994@sirena.org.uk> Cc: "ltsi-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [Stable kernel] feature backporting collaboration List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 07:22:04PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Simply repeating "upstream first" over and over again and telling people > that doing anything else is just silly isn't really helping move things > forward. People have heard this but for a good chunk of the industry > there's a big gap between that simple statement and something that can > be practically acted on in any sort of direct fashion, it can easily > just come over as dismissive and hostile. It's going to be much more > productive to acknowledge the realities people are dealing with and talk > about how people can improve their engagement with upstream, make the > situation better and close the gaps. I think we are in violent agreement here :) thanks, greg k-h