Re: [ANNOUNCE] Shared pull requests (was Re: Workflow for i40iw patch submissions)

[Leon Romanovsky <leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1361 bytes --]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:23:35PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 9/26/2017 12:21 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:03:01PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> >
> > <...>
> >
> >>>> He started to complain about empty merge commit with v4.13-rc1, and continued with explanations
> >>>> about difference between back and forward merges. From my point of view, my intention to base
> >>>> shared pull request on latest -rcX is exactly forward (good) merge, because it ensures that
> >>>> all our future submissions for net/net-next/rdma-rc/rdma-next are completely in sync and
> >>>> ready to go.
> >>
> >> This is why, when I submit a pull request for -rc, I also merge it into
> >> for-next.  It keeps this up to date as you say, without needing to pull
> >> in all of the -rc, so it gives Linus an easier history to look at.  It
> >> does not, however, sync up the net side of things.
> >>
> >
> > Doug,
> >
> > What is the bottom line for the bases for shared pull requests?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> Just base it on either A) my current for-next or B) -rc2.

OK, in this cycle, we will have it on -rc2, but I don't know if it is always
feasible.

Thanks

>
> --
> Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>     GPG Key ID: B826A3330E572FDD
>     Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B  1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
>




[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]