From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761757AbYEESp4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2008 14:45:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762304AbYEESdd (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2008 14:33:33 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:42217 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762300AbYEESdb (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2008 14:33:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 11:31:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: "Pekka Enberg" Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, sfrench@us.ibm.com, swhiteho@redhat.com, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, jeff@garzik.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, drzeus-list@drzeus.cx, jack@ucw.cz, cbou@mail.ru, jens.axboe@oracle.com, ericvh@gmail.com, wim@iguana.be, chris@zankel.net, nico@cam.org, clameter@sgi.com, ezk@cs.sunysb.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next Message-Id: <20080505113128.d68863a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <84144f020805051116mdbbea01q39f17bce95c95dbb@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080502151206.b40f77ea.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <84144f020805051116mdbbea01q39f17bce95c95dbb@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 5 May 2008 21:16:12 +0300 "Pekka Enberg" wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Guys, could you please prepare a tree for Stephen and send the details > > over to him? Please Cc me also. > > > > Once this has happened, there should be no need to run a separate for-mm > > branch. I'll just switch over to using whatever branch linux-next is > > using. > > I was looking at preparing a for-next branch for the SLAB tree but I'm > not sure I understand the above. For something like the slab > allocator, you want as much exposure as possible before asking Linus > to pull so I would like to continue to (ab)use -mm for testing as > well. But that doesn't seem to fit the linux-next rules at all... You have stuff in your tree which isn't intended for 2.6.27?? > So what to do here? I don't have a problem with maintaining separate > branches for mm and next where the latter is not going to get much > action until very late in the release cycle when I'm preparing for the > next merge window. I don't mind, really - just do what you think is best for your subsystem and then tell me and Stephen about it. We'll only notice if you break stuff ;) So I'd suggest that you have a #for-next which contains material for 2.6.26 and 2.6.27 and a #for-mm which contains material for 2.6.28+. Only problem is, I'd need to generate the #for-next -> #for-mm diff, and that particular git operation has been troublesome in the past. otoh, I think that staging for-2.6.26 and for-2.6.27 material in -mm really is reaching far enough into the future, and I'd question the value of staging for-2.6.28+ material as well. I mean, that's half a year away.