No worries. My usual routine just involves pulling up master and jewel branch merge logs for all RBD-related subdirectories in two terminals (for PR merge timeline reference), pulling up the original PR to backport, and then just cherry-pick until a conflict is hit. When that happens, I locate which previous PR made the conflicting change and cherry-pick it into the same backport branch. With this technique, you'll end up with PRs with the same cherry-picked commits. You'll be able to cleanly merge them into a testing branch, but when it comes time to merge into the jewel branch you'll need to rebase some PRs to automatically strip out the duplicate cherry-picks. On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 10/08/2016 22:14, Jason Dillaman wrote: >> Loic, >> >> If you want, I can create the backport PRs for those tickets. > > That would be great. Alternatively, if that's less time consuming for you, just suggest a backport order and I'll figure it out. > > Cheers > >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi Mykola, >>> >>> There are seven rbd-mirror related backports which do not cherry-pick cleanly. I've not looked at each of them yet and I would very much appreciate your advice about the best way to proceed. >>> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16511 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16512 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16658 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16701 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16747 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16902 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16978 >>> >>> Maybe they should be cherry-picked in a specific order in order to avoid conflicts ? For instance, maybe one of the pending backports that you can see at >>> >>> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3Ajewel+label%3Arbd >>> >>> would avoid some of the conflicts if merged ? I'm thinking specifically >>> >>> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/10646 >>> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/10644 >>> >>> What I'm looking for, ideally, is a way to order the cherry-picks to avoid any conflict. That may involve backporting a few additional pull requests (for instance when the type of an argument changes from int64_t to uint64_t, that creates a lot of potential conflicts and backporting that change could help, even if it is not required to fix a given bug. >>> >>> There are three backports that also do not apply because of a conflict but do not seem to be related to rbd-mirror. Unless you advise otherwise, I'll attempt to resolve these individually and assume there is complex interaction with other backports. >>> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16950 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16904 >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16735 >>> >>> Thanks in advance for your guidance ! >>> >>> -- >>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >> >> > > -- > Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre -- Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
