Re: [PATCH v3 iproute2 0/4] Multiple Spanning Tree (MST) Support

[Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>]

On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 10:16:11 -0600
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org> wrote:

> On 7/6/24 1:56 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > The original point was to have kernel -next and iproute2 -next branches
> > and have support arrive at same time on both sides. The problem is when
> > developers get behind, and the iproute2 patches arrive after the kernel cycle
> > and then would end up get delayed another 3 to 4 months.  
> 
> Then the userspace patches should be sent when the kernel patches are
> merged. Period. no excuses. Any delay is on the developer.

I would suggest that the netdev maintainers not accept any new
feature to net-next (that uses iproute2) until/unless the iproute2 update
patch has been posted. This prevents this problem, and the problem of
getting userspace API wrong.

> 
> > 
> > Example:
> > 	If mst had been submitted during 6.9 -next open window, then
> > 	it would have arrived in iproute2 when -next was merged in May 2024 and
> > 	would get released concurrently with 6.10 (July 2024).
> > 	When MST was submitted later, if it goes through -next, then it would
> > 	get merged to main in August 2024 and released concurrently with 6.11
> > 	in October. By merging to main, it will be in July.  
> 
> Same exact problem with netkit and I told Daniel no. We have a
> development policy for new features; it must apply across the board to
> all of them.
> 
> > 
> > I understand your concern, and probably better not to have done it.  
> 
> You applied patches for a new feature just a week or two before release.
> It is just wrong. It would be best to either back up the branch or
> revert them.

Will backup the branch since these are the the last patches merged.