From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, david@fromorbit.com,
djwong@kernel.org, sandeen@redhat.com, bfoster@redhat.com,
aalbersh@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk
Subject: Re: Changes to XFS patch integration process
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 15:05:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250303140547.GA16126@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m6movx2b6yeygut6ow5hjkkfyyu32brsfzjcwydqge5gimz5z3@sw5hrcsah3ga>
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:42:12AM +0100, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> The biggest change here is that for-next will likely need to be rebased
> more often than today. But also patches will spend more time under testings
> in linux-next and everybody will have a more updated tree to work on.
FYI, what other trees do is to keep separate branches for the current
and next release, i.e. right now: for-6.14 and for-6.15 and merge those
into the for-next or have both of them in linux-next (e.g. for-linus and
for-next). In that case most of the time you don't need to rebase at
all. Instead you might occasionally need to merge the current into the
next tree to resolve conflicts, and Linus is fine with that if you
document the reason for that merge.
>
> Also, I'm still thinking how to handle pull requests I receive. I try
> hard to not change the commit hashes from the PRs, so I'm still not sure
> how feasible it will be to keep the same hash ids from PRs giving more often
> than not I'll need to rebase the next merge tree on the top of fixes for the
> current -RC and in some cases, on top of other trees with dependencies.
With the above you just keep the pull requests as-is.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-03 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-03 10:42 Changes to XFS patch integration process Carlos Maiolino
2025-03-03 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-03-03 15:00 ` Carlos Maiolino
2025-03-03 15:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-04 20:20 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-03-06 7:50 ` Carlos Maiolino
2025-03-06 17:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-06 17:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-03-10 10:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20250303140547.GA16126@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=aalbersh@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox