From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id
	q8DHrGbP193553 for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:53:17 -0500
Received: from mail.sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com
	with ESMTP id yDvYT9lJfV2kH54A for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>;
	Thu, 13 Sep 2012 10:54:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <50521DCE.7020203@sandeen.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:54:22 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: userspace trees
References: <20120913075026.GA27256@infradead.org>
	<5052142B.3010601@sandeen.net> <20120913175316.GR3274@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120913175316.GR3274@sgi.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=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: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com

On 9/13/12 12:53 PM, Ben Myers wrote:
> 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.

Sounds like a plan.  Will you make sure everything gets re-synced from kernel.org
so nothing is lost?

hch, you want to remove or somehow deprecate the kernel.org trees?

Thanks,
-Eric

> Regards,
> 	Ben
> 

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs