From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Cc: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC for-4.7] Switching to a single qemu tree each per qemu-xen and qemu-trad
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:40:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55BA3753.4050903@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1438266156.11600.347.camel@citrix.com>
On 30/07/15 15:22, Ian Campbell wrote:
> (CC-ing 2x QEMU maintainers and stable release manager)
>
> The separate trees are a holdover from mercurial, which didn't (at the
> time) have a good in-repo branching model.
>
> I propose that Xen 4.6 should be the last release which uses these split
> trees and that instead we combine them into just qemu-xen.git (upstream)
> and qemu-xen-traditional.git (our old fork), with branches in those repos
> to match our releases. I picked those names to match the libxl interface
> names for these.
Very much +1 with my XenServer hat on.
>
> This will result in one place to get all the qemu stable branches for a
> given qemu type, without having to remember the naming scheme (which is
> counter-intuitive). It will allow easier cherry-picking and produce less
> places for users to look for our code etc.
>
> We could put all branches for both in the same tree but I think we want to
> just let qemu-xen-trad sit quietly in its own corner. Keeping it separate
> reinforces that it is almost completely frozen, also it saves me having to
> think up a branch naming scheme within a single repo.
>
> A proposed mapping for the two tree scheme which broadly follows the
> xen.git scheme is (paths relative to xenbits git root):
>
> qemu-xen-traditional:
>
> /staging/qemu-xen-unstable.git#master => /qemu-xen-traditional.git#staging
> /staging/qemu-xen-X.Y-testing.git#master => /qemu-xen-traditional.git#staging-X.Y
> /qemu-xen-unstable.git#master => /qemu-xen-traditional.git#master
> /qemu-xen-X.Y-testing.git#master => /qemu-xen-traditional.git#stable-X.Y
And take the change to drop the other random branches in the repository
By my observations:
$ git remote show upstream
* remote upstream
...
Remote branches:
ide-write-cache
iwj.block-extendable-flag
origin
qemu
upstream
vga-reverse-merge
xen.netscriptenv
>
> NB the revision to use is still referenced in xen.git/Config.mk for
> each branch, no change here.
>
> XXX why do staging/* exist, and what pushes from staging to the other?
> Should we ditch one or the other?
This is how staging used to work for the mecurial xen trees. I presume
therefore that whatever used to be done for the Xen trees are still
being done for the current qemu trees.
>
> qemu-xen:
>
> /staging/qemu-upstream-unstable.git#master => /qemu-xen.git#staging
> /staging/qemu-upstream-X.Y-testing.git#master => /qemu-xen.git#staging-X.Y
> /qemu-upstream-unstable.git#master => /qemu-xen.git#master
> /qemu-upstream-X.Y-testing.git#master => /qemu-xen.git#stable-X.Y
>
> These are push gated by their respective qemu-upstream-* osstest flights.
>
> qemu-mainline:
>
> Upstream remains git://git.qemu.org/qemu.git.
>
> /osstest/qemu.git#mainline/xen-tested-master => /qemu-xen.git#upstream-tested
>
> /osstest/qemu.git should be removed.
>
> NB this is the same qemu-xen.git as above.
>
> Below is an osstest patch which implements this proposed scheme (I've not
> actually created any trees).
LGTM.
Also suitable adjustments to the landing page at http://xenbits.xen.org/
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-30 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-30 14:22 [RFC for-4.7] Switching to a single qemu tree each per qemu-xen and qemu-trad Ian Campbell
2015-07-30 14:33 ` Ian Jackson
2015-07-30 14:46 ` Ian Campbell
2015-07-30 14:40 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2015-07-30 15:11 ` Ian Jackson
2015-07-30 14:51 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-07-30 14:57 ` Ian Campbell
2015-08-03 10:14 ` George Dunlap
2015-08-11 14:45 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55BA3753.4050903@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.