Re: [Xenomai] git://git.xenomai.org/ipipe.git reshuffle, 3.8.0 kernel support

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

On 2013-06-11 16:45, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> There is no requirement to push stable patches back to master.

It makes no sense to push them back, would rather break our model, that
is my point.

> The only requirement is to branch off master for tracking a stable release. 
> master is currently 3.8(.0). We'll see how that works. So, 3.8.13 can go 
> over ipipe-next which is 3.8.10 already, then we may branch off 
> ipipe-3.8.13 from that head, and switch ipipe-next to 3.9 when we have 
> something sensible there.

So ipipe-next would jump around, at some point tracking master, then
again stable - makes no sense. Having multiple ipipe-3.8.x branches
makes no sense to me either.

Things should work like this:
 - master tracks Linus master, thus will never contain any 3.x.y
   releases
 - ipipe-next is the next master state, but may be thrown away again
   due to reworks until it is finally merged into master
 - stable branches are forked off from master when it reached a 3.x.0
   release point. From then on, fixes to master need to be back-ported
   to stable (cherry-picked in the simple case)
 - additionally, Linux stable releases are merged into the ipipe stable
   branches, resolving conflicts just like we do in master when pulling
   Linus changes in

If you think we need some ipipe-3.x-next branches as well (as staging
trees for the stable branches), ok. But let's keep things simple first,
I would say. Risk of regressions in stable merges is generally much
lower than in master updates.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux