Question about ntfs3 git pull request

Question about ntfs3 git pull request

[Konstantin Komarov]

Hello, Stephen, Linus!

I have a question about next git pull request.

After first ntfs3 pull request [1] was accepted
there are some new commits, that I want to send for rc5 probably
(need more tests + some time in linux-next).

I've noticed, that I missed step
"If your upstream-bound branch has emptied entirely into the mainline
during the merge window, you can pull it forward with a command like"
from Kernel Maintainer Handbook [2].

Right now my github repo still based on 5.14-rc7.
Do I need to update it with git merge up to 5.15-rcX?
Or will it be ok to send git pull request as is and
back merge master only when 5.15 will release?


[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/aa4aa155-b9b2-9099-b7a2-349d8d9d8fbd@paragon-software.com/T/#u
[2]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/maintainer/rebasing-and-merging.html#finally

Re: Question about ntfs3 git pull request

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 9:47 AM Konstantin Komarov
<almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com> wrote:
>
>
> Right now my github repo still based on 5.14-rc7.
> Do I need to update it with git merge up to 5.15-rcX?

Oh, keep your previous base, and just send me a pull request with your
changes and no merge.

In fact, the best workflow is generally to avoid merging from me as
much as humanly possible, but then if you notice that we're all in
sync, and you have nothing pending in your tree, you can basically
fast-forward and start any new development at some new point.

But even then, it's a good idea to make that new point be something
well-defined - like a full release, or at least an rc release (usually
avoiding rc1 is good, since rc1 can be a bit experimental).

But I have no problems pulling from a git tree that is based on older
kernels. I much prefer than to having  people rebase their work overly
aggressively, or having people do lots of merges of my tree.

At some point, if you end up being multiple releases behind, it ends
up being inconvenient for both of us just because some infrastructure
has changed, so _occasionally_ syncing up is just a good idea.

In my experience, people tend to do it too much, rather than too
little. Don't worry too much about it.

               Linus

Re: Question about ntfs3 git pull request

[Kari Argillander]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 07:47:09PM +0300, Konstantin Komarov wrote:
> Hello, Stephen, Linus!
> 
> I have a question about next git pull request.
> 
> After first ntfs3 pull request [1] was accepted
> there are some new commits, that I want to send for rc5 probably
> (need more tests + some time in linux-next).

Imo you can send PR before rc5. No need to send head if you do not want.
Some of the patches has already been in linux-next almoust 3 weeks. Also
other people might want to test what we have done. Of course they are in
linux-next but many folks test Linus rc's so we want there patches also.
If we do massive commit dump to rc5 it is quite close already release
date and other people do not get testing time so much.

  Argillander

> I've noticed, that I missed step
> "If your upstream-bound branch has emptied entirely into the mainline
> during the merge window, you can pull it forward with a command like"
> from Kernel Maintainer Handbook [2].
> 
> Right now my github repo still based on 5.14-rc7.
> Do I need to update it with git merge up to 5.15-rcX?
> Or will it be ok to send git pull request as is and
> back merge master only when 5.15 will release?
> 
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/aa4aa155-b9b2-9099-b7a2-349d8d9d8fbd@paragon-software.com/T/#u
> [2]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/maintainer/rebasing-and-merging.html#finally