[OE-core] [PATCH] powertop: update to 2.0+git

[Koen Kooi]

Op 16 jul. 2012, om 12:36 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:

> On Monday 16 July 2012 12:33:00 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
>>> On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi <koen at dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>>>>> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches; it is nice to have
>>>>> those to track the pending patches.
>>>> 
>>>> Isn't that field only used to put in "pending" and then backslap each
>>>> other on doing such a good job?> 
>>> Personally I find it incredibly useful to differentiate between
>>> patches that should be going upstream and patches that are OE-specific
>>> for various reasons.
>> 
>> I'm not debating the usefulness of the U-S field, I'm debating the
>> usefulness of using 'Pending' as a catch-all. I can do:
>> 
>> for patch in *.patch ; do
>> 	echo "Upstream-Status: Pending" >> $patch
>> done
>> 
>> And it will get accepted, but is ultimately useless.
> 
> No, it is not. It signifies that the patch is considered appropriate by the 
> submitter for upstreaming.

That's not true according to http://wiki.openembedded.org/index.php/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations :

  Pending
  - No determination has been made yet or not yet submitted to upstream

I've argued before that 'Pending' should be renamed to 'Unknown' (as we already do in the meta-openembedded layers) to avoid exactly this confusion.

regards,

Koen