On 06/25/2014 09:59 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 14:03:08 -0400 Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
I haven't pulled in Paul's tree, I merged with the latest Linus release.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
