Re: Merging PCI pass-through code

[Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@il.ibm.com>]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:44:37AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 3/6/07 17:52, "Guy Zana" <guy@neocleus.com> wrote:
> 
> > Since both Neocleus' solution & Intel's solution have overlapping
> > implementations, we should determine what should stays and what goes.
> > There is a question on how should we do the merge?
>
> I like the idea of a separate tree, just for the short term, as a
> shared workspace for merging and development and bug fixing. I can
> arrange to create a new repo called xen-hvm-directio.hg (or a better
> name if you can think of one)? From the list of points below it
> sounds like both sets of patches need some work, quite apart from
> the required merging. Would this method of development suit
> everyone?

Fine by me, provided the end result still shows up on the list for
review before it gets pulled. I do think however that a shared tree
will only be useful if there will be a gate-keeper who will decide
what goes in and what doesn't (based on consensus ). And once there
are bits of the patches that everyone agrees should go in, they could
just go to xen-unstable directly and skip the merge tree...

Cheers,
Muli