userspace trees

userspace trees

[Christoph Hellwig]

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.

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

Re: userspace trees

[Carlos Maiolino]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 03:50:26AM -0400, 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.
> 
Maintaining oss only looks easier to me and less error prone (in regards on keep
trees synchronized) than still keep the kernel.org xfs tree.

To be honest I've never used the kernel.org xfs trees, so, at least for me this
makes sense.

-- 
--Carlos

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

Re: userspace trees

[Eric Sandeen]

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.

-Eric

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

Re: userspace trees

[Ben Myers]

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

Re: userspace trees

[Eric Sandeen]

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

Re: userspace trees

[Ben Myers]

Hey Eric & Christoph,

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:54:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> 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?

~/dmapi$ git pull korg master
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/dmapi-dev
 * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
 Already up-to-date.

~/xfsdump$ git pull korg master
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsdump-dev
 * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
 Already up-to-date.

~/xfsprogs$ git pull kernel.org master
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsprogs-dev
 * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
Updating a8decaf..7db1e7b
Fast-forward
 db/bmap.c       |    4 ++--
 db/btblock.c    |   11 -----------
 mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c |   15 +++++++++------
 repair/bmap.c   |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 repair/dir2.c   |    6 +++++-
 5 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

I've brought xfsprogs master branch uptodate here
git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git

~/xfstests # git pull korg master
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev
 * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
Auto-merging group
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in group
Auto-merging 285.out
CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in 285.out
Auto-merging 285
CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in 285
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

I've merged and brought xfstests master branch uptodate here
git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests.git

Did I miss anything?  Any other branches to copy over?

Thanks,
Ben

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

Re: userspace trees

[Eric Sandeen]

On 9/13/12 3:10 PM, Ben Myers wrote:
> Hey Eric & Christoph,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:54:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> 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?
> 
> ~/dmapi$ git pull korg master
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/dmapi-dev
>  * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
>  Already up-to-date.
> 
> ~/xfsdump$ git pull korg master
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsdump-dev
>  * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
>  Already up-to-date.
> 
> ~/xfsprogs$ git pull kernel.org master
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsprogs-dev
>  * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
> Updating a8decaf..7db1e7b
> Fast-forward
>  db/bmap.c       |    4 ++--
>  db/btblock.c    |   11 -----------
>  mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c |   15 +++++++++------
>  repair/bmap.c   |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  repair/dir2.c   |    6 +++++-
>  5 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> I've brought xfsprogs master branch uptodate here
> git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git
> 
> ~/xfstests # git pull korg master
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev
>  * branch            master     -> FETCH_HEAD
> Auto-merging group
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in group
> Auto-merging 285.out
> CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in 285.out
> Auto-merging 285
> CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in 285
> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
> 
> I've merged and brought xfstests master branch uptodate here
> git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests.git
> 
> Did I miss anything?  Any other branches to copy over?

I've not done anything except with the master branch.

-Eric

> Thanks,
> Ben
> 

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

Re: userspace trees

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:54:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> hch, you want to remove or somehow deprecate the kernel.org trees?

I'll replace them with a Checkin that just has a file mentioning that
the trees have moved.

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