Hello Arnd,
[]
> > No, sorry for the confusion and not making this clear - I wrote the
> > original mail as a follow-up to "Android Code Review" session,
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-android/+spec/linaro-android-o-code-review
> >
> > http://summit.linaro.org/uds-o/meeting/linaro-a
On Saturday 21 May 2011, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2011 09:23:28 +0200
> Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> > 2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
> >
> > > I look at Gerrit from
> > > Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> > > use it in this scenario: it's what the up
Hello Linus,
On Sat, 21 May 2011 09:23:28 +0200
Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > I look at Gerrit from
> > Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> > use it in this scenario: it's what the upstream uses, so good it or
> > bad, if we want to
2011/5/19 Paul Sokolovsky :
> I look at Gerrit from
> Linaro Android perspective, and there's of course one good reason to
> use it in this scenario: it's what the upstream uses, so good it or
> bad, if we want to work with upstrean, we'll need to eat Google's own
> dogfood.
True for any FOSS tha
On 19 May 2011 23:01, Michael Hope wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
>> Well, so bottom line of this, as far as I see it, is: Gerrit is de facto
>> tool for Android, and for Linaro Android we'd like to be sure that it
>> supports more flexible/advanced approach than
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Paul Sokolovsky
wrote:
> Hello Linus,
[snip]
> Well, so bottom line of this, as far as I see it, is: Gerrit is de facto
> tool for Android, and for Linaro Android we'd like to be sure that it
> supports more flexible/advanced approach than which is seen typically
>
Hello Linus,
On Wed, 18 May 2011 13:07:50 +0200
Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working
> > with multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> > against single (master) branch (as far as I under
2011/5/18 Patrik Ryd :
> On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> I think it basically boils down to the fact that a single
>> Gerrit branch is seen as "the place to integrate", whereas
>> in kernel terms, you should integrate a single topic
>> (such as "i2c updates", "boardfiles", "regulator
On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
>
> > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with
> > multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> > against single (master) branch (as far as I understood).
>
> It was mainly me
2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky :
> You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with
> multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work
> against single (master) branch (as far as I understood).
It was mainly me blathering about Gerrit in that session so don't
go afte
On 16 May 2011 17:52, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> Hello Arnd,
>
> I'd like to follow up to the discussion which took place during
> "Android Code Review" session at LDS
> (https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Specs/AndroidCodeReview).
>
> You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for
11 matches
Mail list logo
