Request for inclusion of ep93xx tree in linux-next

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> Thanks for the tip. I leave the branches as is for the moment. If I end
> up adding any additional branches to my tree, then I will look at
> creating an ep93xx-for-next branch then. In this case, should the
> for-next branch just be a regular merge of all the other branches I
> have?

Yes. In the arm-soc tree I usually just merge all changes on top
of the for-next branch, and occasionally clean it up, starting over
with a fresh -rc release and pulling the other branches in, then
use git-diff to make sure the contents are identical to what they
were before.

> How do I make it verifiable that everything from the other
> branches has been being tested in the for-next branch?

I'm not sure I understand the question. Maybe you are looking
for 'git branch --no-merged for-next' That command will show
all local branches that are not merged into the for-next branch.

	Arnd