Greg, Stephen, Konstantin, so for the Linux backports project [0] we rely on a few git trees: * linux-next.git * linux-stable.git * linux.git The linux.git tree is required for RC releases. The linux-stable.git tree for extraversion stable releases, and the linux-next.git tree for daily snapshots. There is a trick for stable releases whereby we accelerate the integration of pending-stable patches by cherry picking them out of linux-next.git if the commit log entry has the 'stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' on the commit log, and if the stable patch does not apply we require the developers to provide a backport compatible port. This trick works swell on linux-next.git for RC release given that we can query for rc releases there as linux-next carries them but linux-next.git does not carry extra version tags. Additionally the requirement of linux.git is only there given that at times there are delays between which linux-stable.git will not have an RC release on it. I have a way to address all these issues, namely to add linux.git as a remote for my local linux-stable tree, and also by adding linux-stable as a local remote for my linux-next tree. Now, I document how I resolve this for backport package consumers / builders but it occurs to me perhaps we can simplify this if we had: * linux-next - pulling in linux-stable packs / tags * a new linux-releases.git - which has both linux.git and linux-stable pulled together through a cronjob Would this be reasonable to accommodate to help ease of use or shall we just live with folks having to do the remote / local remote hacks? [0] https://backports.wiki.kernel.org/ LUis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
