Hi Paul, On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 14:03:08 -0400 Paul Moore wrote: > > On Friday, June 20, 2014 12:06:28 PM Paul Moore wrote: > > {big snip} > > > Stephen, assuming for a moment that I created a fresh branch, based against > > 3.15, and then added the SELinux patches for 3.16 (basically the few new > > patches that were in the ole #next branch) would that serve as a reasonable > > basis for a new SELinux #next branch? Around the -rc5/6/7 timeframe I would > > send a pull request to James to pull from this next branch into the Linux > > Security branch for 3.17. Once 3.16 is released, I would merge that into > > this new #next branch and continue with the next round of patches. > > > > FYI, more or less, the above is the process we've settled upon for all of > > the trees that get accumulated into the Linux Security tree. > > Does the above work for you in linux-next? I'd like to try and resolve this > sooner rather than later and I imagine you feel the same ... Well, I see that James has pulled your tree, so past problems are now moot. He has some duplicate commits in his tree now and Linus will get a few more when he next pulls James' tree. We just need to avoid this going forward. And given that James or Serge will, from now on, *pull* your tree (not cherry-pick from it), things should be fine. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au