From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m6O61ZXr006489 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:01:36 -0700 Message-ID: <48881B02.20900@sgi.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:02:42 +1000 From: Mark Goodwin Reply-To: markgw@sgi.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes References: <1216556394-17529-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1216556394-17529-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20080722042829.GB27123@infradead.org> <20080722053019.GI6761@disturbed> <20080722072733.GA15376@infradead.org> <20080723000548.GG5947@disturbed> <488692FB.1010101@sgi.com> <48875040.9090400@thebarn.com> In-Reply-To: <48875040.9090400@thebarn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Russell Cattelan Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Russell Cattelan wrote: >> Internally, we're attempting to refine our patch acceptance processes, >> (e.g. gitify our internal dev tree and mirror it on oss so it's much >> easier to push back out to oss). > I'm sure you have seen this before: > http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=cattelan/xfs-import/.git;a=summary' > That is a running mirror of the ptools tree into git. (via the cvs tree) yes. But it's git -> ptools scripts that we need, preserving history, etc. Niv has some scripts for this - they're not production quality yet, but we're getting there. Once this transitions, it'll be a *lot* easier for us to pull in patches from external developer branches because we'll all be using git for checkin. > It would be really nice to move all xfs development to git finally shut > down > the whole ptools -> cvs update process. once our internal dev tree is git based and internal git->ptools merging is fully automatic, there is no actual need to shutdown the cvs crons. It's worked for years and can stay running, no harm. > This would help facilitate creation of more "experimental" trees and/or > branches > so there would not be such a long delay of getting patches distributed. I think we'd just end up with a git dev branch on oss, maybe with a daily pull from the internal dev tree (Russell, that would render your cvs->git mirror obsolete I guess). In any case, patch flow and turn-around should be greatly improved. Anyone have comments on any of the above? Cheers -- Mark