From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <51B73A86.2040107@siemens.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:56:06 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <51A30F04.701@xenomai.org> <51A39043.5010609@xenomai.org> <51B70BF0.9040904@siemens.com> <51B724A9.4040307@xenomai.org> <51B726CE.2010201@siemens.com> <51B72DBD.1080504@xenomai.org> <51B72EFE.70304@siemens.com> <51B73110.5000100@xenomai.org> <51B7319C.8060903@siemens.com> <51B7380B.80209@xenomai.org> In-Reply-To: <51B7380B.80209@xenomai.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] git://git.xenomai.org/ipipe.git reshuffle, 3.8.0 kernel support List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Philippe Gerum Cc: "Xenomai@xenomai.org" 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