Re: Process (was Re: [PATCH mm-hotfixes-unstable v18 00/14] khugepaged: add mTHP) collapse support

["David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>]

>>> and have people
>>> base work against that?
>>
>> This I'm not so sure how it would work. Assuming we have submaintainers with
>> their trees and branches, the final "stable branch" is merged from those.
> 
> I feel like it could get hairy pretty quick, but I guess the key thing here is -
> maintainers resolve merge conflicts.
> 
> As long as we have a specific _solid_ basis for work.
> 
> I think actually this speaks to it being sensible for each submaintainer with a
> separate tree to maintain their own repos rather than branches.
> 
> We need to determine what this baseline would be for each tree though.
> 
> So perhaps each submaintainer tree has for-mm-next that's the stable branch from
> mm-next + any stabliised local changes.
> 
> And each week this gets merged to mm-next, and everybody resets to mm-next
> stable branch?

I think it gets way more complicated than that once we involve hotfix branches,
and dependencies between hotfixes, topic branches and all of that. And in
particular, if we have to drop a topic branch in some circumstances.

My first step will be to understand "how would it look like without
submaintainers" when only having topic branches.

Then, add a complexity level on top with subcomonent maintainers :)

I'll probably schedule a session in 2 weeks.

Whom to invite?

-- 
Cheers,

David