On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Fathi Boudra <fathi.bou...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 11 October 2011 13:02, Eric Miao <eric.m...@linaro.org> wrote: >> All, >> >> Along with more bugs filed against Freescale kernels, I'd propose that we >> use a consistent tagging rule as below (Freescale internally is using more >> non-"i" prefixed version, so we're following): >> >> mx51 - for i.MX51 specific bugs >> mx53 - for i.MX53 specific bugs >> mx6 - for i.MX6DQ and other i.MX6 variants >> mx51evk - for i.MX51 Babbage/EVK board specific bugs >> mx53loco - for i.MX53 QuickStart board specific bugs >> mx6qs - for i.MX6DQ QuickStart specific bugs >> linaro-android - for Android bugs >> >> Internally, we are also using the following tags: >> >> v3.1 - for 3.1 kernel specific bugs >> ripley - for bugs of the new i.MX53 QuickStart w/ MC34708 as PMIC > > The process for tagging bugs already exists. We followed this process until > now: > https://wiki.linaro.org/Process/Bugs/Tags
Ah that looks good. Shame I didn't know that. I'll make the tags of Freescale LT bugs to be consistent then. > > As far as I'm concerned, we're consistent with the process in place :) Yes. > What do you mean by "Freescale internally"? It's basically the abbreviations Freescale uses in code, bug description and docs. Maybe Spring can give some more details, as I learned this from him :-) > > Cheers, > > Fathi > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev > _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
