On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If > the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we > certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last -rc that performs worse > just because that's "easier to communicate".
I agree, I wasn't envisioning winding backwards, more that we stop winding forwards at a chosen -rc, or stop merging topics on a Friday, bring the common tree up-to-date with the weekends Torvalds -rc, then build, test and fix this ready for Linaro RC on the Friday. However... > Likewise in unified case, there might not be much choice about which > recent kernels had most LTs participating with workable content, if > that's on an intermediate HEAD we can't be sniffy. True. Also, the common tree is going to have the most recent HEAD that any contributing team chose to base their topics on. So in practice we're going to have a random mix of kernel version in a release, and it's not worth getting hung up on Torvalds -rc version. -- Tixy _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
