Re: xen/tip.git and how it should function?

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 05:22:57PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2013, David Vrabel wrote:
> > On 31/07/13 16:48, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Wed, 31 Jul 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > >>>> With two maintainers, this should be easy enough - each maintainer can put his or her
> > >>>> patches in their local tree (or some git tree). Create a 'stable/for-linus-3.12' and
> > >>>> do a git merge on his or her local tree, and push said 'stable/for-linus-3.12' up
> > >>>> to the tip tree.
> > >>>
> > >>> It might be worth giving an heads up to each others, at least before
> > >>> pull requests to Linus.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The other thing is that we could name them differently. Say:
> > >>
> > >> 	stable/for-linus-3.12.generic (for drivers/xen)
> > >> 	stable/for-linux-3.12.x86     (arch/x86/xen...)
> > >> 	stable/for-linux-3.12.arm
> > >>
> > >> and then there are just three GIT PULLs during the merge window?
> > >>
> > > 
> > > I think it's best if we only have one pull request. Regardless of the
> > > number of pull requests certainly we need only one linux-next branch.
> > > Therefore if we go for tree branches, eventually they need to be merged
> > > into a single tree anyway. The three branches strategy might work well
> > > for internal coordination between us though:
> > > 
> > > - we work independently on our own branches as usual
> > > 
> > > - when we are ready we give an heads up to the others and we merge into
> > > the single tree and linux-next (could the single tree be linux-next?)
> > 
> > You're not supposed to base anything off linux-next.  I can't see how it
> > would work either.
> 
> I meant linux-next as the name of the branch we are going to use for
> linux-next. Not the linux-next tree.

Right, as patches that are going to Linus are suppose to stew in
linux-next. At least to sort out any other tree dependencies.