Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 02:04:14PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > > I would like to propose we organize ourselves more akin to the other > > large subsystems. We are one of the few where everybody sends their > > own PR to Linus, so oftentimes the first time we're testing eachothers > > code is when we all rebase our respective trees onto -rc1. I think > > we could benefit from getting more organized amongst ourselves, having > > a single tree we all flow into, and then have that tree flow into Linus. > > This sounds like a great idea to me. As someone who does a lot of > changes that touch a lot of filesystems, I'd benefit from this model. > It's very frustrating to be told "Oh, submit patches against tree X > which isn't included in linux-next". > > A potential downside is that it increases the risk of an ntfs3 style > disaster where the code is essentially dumped on all other fs maintainers. > But I like the idea of a maintainer group which allows people to slide > in and out of the "patch pumpkin" role. Particularly if it lets more > junior developers take a turn at wrangling patches. Would it make sense to have an MM + FS tree, given that a lot of MM changes affect filesystems too? Or, at least, a common branch between the MM and FS trees for things that affect both? David
