On Sat, 2017-05-13 at 09:25 +0200, hch wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 08:14:03PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > How should we proceed to merge this series? Given that it is
> > changing a
> > lot of function headers, but not actually changing functionality,
> > might
> > it be possible to merge it out-of-band with the merge window (e.g.
> > next
> > week) in order to minimise the amount of work needed to fix up
> > future
> > patches?
>
> I'd be ok with that, but someone would have to sign up to take the
> heat when Linus doesn't like it, and it won't be me :)
Meh... Linus hates us all anyway, so I'm fine with taking the heat on
that.
> Otherwiase a shared stable branch sounds fine. I can provide one
> for you on infradead or one of you could sign up for it.
>
Right, so the alternative is that either Bruce or Anna merges the full
set, and then both pull that common base into their linux-next branches
on linux-nfs.org, and we then ask everyone to develop their 4.13
patches against those branches. That would work too...
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
