On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 09:43:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 16 July 2018 at 21:26, BALATON Zoltan <address@hidden> wrote:
> I could list sm501 in the sam460ex section thus formally taking
> sub-maintainership but this would only go as far that I'll get cc-d on
> changes and try to review them. I still can't (and don't want to) maintain
> my own tree and send pull requests directly so I'd need someone's help with
> that who can take my patches and merge them via their tree. If it's OK to
> continue to use the PPC tree for that I'm fine with that if David agrees
> (which I think he did above).
>
> So is it OK to add sm501 to sam460ex section so I claim responsibility for
> changes and will continue sending patches cc-ing David (and maybe Gerd to
> help spotting problems) then David could take these via the PPC tree?
I think that makes sense. sh4 is pretty dead and if sm501's major
active user is the sam460ex then listing it there seems reasonable.
Sounds good to me.
Zoltan, can you send a patch adding sm501 to the sam460ex section of
the MAINTAINERS file. That will make you the right point of contact
for it.
On the understanding that it's just about tree logistics, rather than
review, I'll be happy to take sm501 patches from you through my tree.