From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q8DHqEB3193374 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:52:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:53:16 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: userspace trees Message-ID: <20120913175316.GR3274@sgi.com> References: <20120913075026.GA27256@infradead.org> <5052142B.3010601@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5052142B.3010601@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com Hi Eric, On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:13:15PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/13/12 2:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > It seems with the kernel.org account purge last year and me being way to > > busy it seems like the -dev trees of the XFS userspace get very little > > attention. What do people think about retiring them and using the oss > > trees exclusively again for now? Right now the trees are getting a bit > > out of sync which isn't a good thing. > > ISTR it was done in response to a .... fear of SGI being less responsive after > a different type of account purge. ;) > > If SGI wants to be responsible for merging all userspace patches as they > come in on the list, I'm fine with going back to one tree on oss. I discussed this with management. SGI is willing to take on the responsibility of merging all userspace patches. I think retiring the -dev trees will resolve the out-of-sync issues we've been having, and be less confusing for all involved. Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs