From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Kurth Subject: Re: [Need Input] (informal) Automotive PV drivers subproject request Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 13:25:27 +0100 Message-ID: <5395A7B7.4080203@xen.org> References: <538F2BA7.8060806@xen.org> <1401899758.6866.44.camel@Solace> <1402045192.29759.31.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <5391BC9C.40503@xen.org> <1402067321.1313.95.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <1402092104.29895.18.camel@Abyss> Reply-To: lars.kurth@xen.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Stefano Stabellini , Dario Faggioli Cc: Artem Mygaiev , Ian Campbell , Ian Jackson , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , David Vrabel , Andrii Tseglytskyi List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/06/2014 11:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Sat, 7 Jun 2014, Dario Faggioli wrote: >>>>> Officially supported Xen Project repositories should only depend on >>>>> *upstreams* (Xen, Linux, ...). As we are talking about >>>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/pvdrivers.git here (as suggested by Aertem), >>>>> whatever is in that repo (owned by a subproject) should build and work >>>>> with vanilla Xen and Linux. >>>> Is this pvdrivers.git going to be a descendent (e.g. a git clone) of >>>> xen.git? Or is it a fresh repository which contains this new set of >>>> drivers which do not have a home in xen.git? >>> pvdrivers.git shall not be a clone for xen.git. Indeed, it is a set of >>> drivers that, as you said, do not have a home in xen.git or kernel.git >>> >> Indeed. What I've got in mind is something like the following: >> >> xenbits.org/[artem?]/xen-automotive.git integration tree I am assuming xen-automotive.git = xen.git with hacks (as a staging tree) So wouldn't it be better the to have xenbits/people/automotive/artem?/xen.git instead of a renamed tree? >> xenbits.org/pvdrivers.git 'additional pvdrivers' (subproject?) tree >> >> I concur with Ian that the latter should host everything that does not >> have any proper upstream (like linux userspace components), or that >> can't be upstreamed for non technical reasons (like QNX components). >> What I'd allow is probably for some Linux *kernel* components, just out >> of convenience, although, again, I think the goal there should be >> similar to what we said wrt Xen: *upstream them all*!! :-D Wouldn't that complicate merging, etc. It actually would only become convenient for building and terrible for upstreaming Which is why I argued for * xenbits.org/pvdrivers.git = clean and purely dependent on * xenbits.org/people/automotive/artem?/*.git to contain hacks for Linux kernel, etc. The workflow would be: * xenbits.org/people/automotive/artem?/*.git ... initial contribution and space to clean up hacks * xenbits.org/pvdrivers.git ... clean repo reflecting what is upstream. This is the final destination for PV drivers not living elsewhere. This is where the pvdrivers subproject would make releases from, etc. > It sounds like we are heading toward creating both personal trees and > pvdrivers.git. That was my assumption too. See earlier mail > The personal trees would be personal trees like everybody else's: they > could be used for WIP patch series and pull requests. They are no > different from mine and yours. Agreed > pvdrivers.git is the interesting one because it would be the upstream > git repository for otherwise homeless pv drivers, such us userspace and > QNX PV drivers. Agreed > > In my opinion Linux kernel drivers should stay in their personal git > trees as WIP patch series until upsteamed. Agreed Regards Lars