From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E52181A42D3 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 11:07:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727348843; cv=none; b=Yd2l+0A2eyn+wf/SaYrIwopAwcuvfwhGFAzG988dhfJ/Dw9foh8CJXSwVz37Y+lf1hrtQescOI9cJ3lvrSA0CLtAMyAtgserndStboxLnkn3F+E9gl+9V/ryS3OoGj3Vtgxm8X1aqZTCIk3g9iMzkarWRy9/H7M3Dr5wDwi0mBc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727348843; c=relaxed/simple; bh=urmfNhw4Y6IT53N/NfCaF31cBUcnQE54JsIQX+33WHA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=d7pj2mi8I38i20xcnCoQ/qv2haa9kHqrZ66dTv2bk06DFIjYjSoZaC/vOuN4IT2EEXH+T1B12Rq19Hc6G778nDRn/opCcrv5u2bVfrLFSH5C/s6AYqtPzzuotFsCjCixynHSz3Ajc1grLBxJhAg3FGaYVXVvGzTpWs4lZ9bbdvo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=HnWWDKQD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="HnWWDKQD" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (81-175-209-231.bb.dnainternet.fi [81.175.209.231]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84D758D4; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:05:51 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1727348751; bh=urmfNhw4Y6IT53N/NfCaF31cBUcnQE54JsIQX+33WHA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=HnWWDKQDqLh3zJJ/Sr8crBGCiu13nlMOcHa+tydukAynYlIgv00ModPydMG/bvDOx HBiPY4UtxT2rkqVc9mGNfo4E+CDvtwEM8kychLew6+m1vvMa6QwLr19rXz+DR+/a8J vExlZ5YNW4eRZ3GHWGbNK/rH3AyizDQB1OCOC7jA= Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 14:07:17 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: Sakari Ailus , Hans Verkuil , Sebastian Fricke , Linux Media Mailing List , Daniel Almeida , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Martin Hecht , Tommaso Merciai , Jacopo Mondi , Benjamin Mugnier , Ricardo Ribalda , Michael Tretter , Alain Volmat , Sean Young , Steve Cho , Tomasz Figa , Hidenori Kobayashi , "Hu, Jerry W" , Suresh Vankadara , Devarsh Thakkar , r-donadkar@ti.com, Dave Stevenson , Mehdi Djait , Nicolas Dufresne , Salahaldeen Altous Subject: Re: [ANN] Media Summit September 16th: Final Agenda (v7) Message-ID: <20240926110717.GF21788@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <98236d10-4024-4b96-a8ce-8e1dc2a34f1b@xs4all.nl> <20240917091744.qltmddftdy7bpgpg@basti-XPS-13-9310> <20240918092454.21884920@sal.lan> <20240925195843.GK30399@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <902b2828-5eb8-4741-90af-8e42f1240e86@xs4all.nl> <20240926121914.69b47a50@foz.lan> <20240926102448.GA21788@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20240926125358.4edf0f9a@foz.lan> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240926125358.4edf0f9a@foz.lan> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:53:58PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:24:48 +0300 Laurent Pinchart escreveu: > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:19:14PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Em Thu, 26 Sep 2024 09:30:34 +0000 Sakari Ailus escreveu: > > > > > > > Yet, even if the committer did an honest handling of the patch, you may > > > still disagree or want some changes at the original patch. On such cases, > > > the maintainers may decide to drop the changes and do a normal review > > > process. They may otherwise request a patch on the top of the applied > > > one to address the pointed issues. > > > > Let's do a revert in that case, and keep rebases for cases where having > > content in the git history causes issues other than bisection problems. > > Rebasing or not is a subsystem maintainers decision. The job of a maintainer is to make their subsystem thrive. The power of making decisions comes with the responsibility of cattering for the needs of the community. In this case, I think the community wants to avoid rebases as much as possible. Let's work together on avoiding them by improving whatever processes need to be improved. > Reverting pollutes > git history upstream, and it should be done in cases were we want to > preserve the history upstream. On cases where the preserving the history > doesn't matter, a rebase is better. > > There is also a bad side effect of doing: > > - patch 1: some fixes with c/c stable + fixes tag > - patch 2: revert patch 1 > - patch 3: apply patch 1 on a different way > > Even with just 3 patches, this can get messy when backporting to fixes, > as we don't want all three patches backported. We want just patch 3. > > There are also cases like: > > - patch 1: some fixes with c/c stable + fixes tag > - patch 2: revert patch 1 > - patch 3: a patch needed by patch 1 to not break compilation > - patch 4: re-apply patch 1 > > in this case, patch 3 (or a variant of it) may or may not needed > to be in fixes. > > This becomes even more complex if there is a pile of patches with > some with c/c stable and some without. We're talking about rare cases here. Let's focus the process on avoiding rebases. If you think a rebase is needed at some point, let's discuss it and find consensus. > I saw already enough badly solved merge conflicts risen on different > trees because one change was reverted and then applied back with > about the same content. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart