On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 07:47:21AM +0000, Amrani, Ram wrote: > Hi Doug, > > > > Can we move to pull-request model? > > > > Yes, I'm fine with that. > > > > I'm in favor too. > I think this will lower overhead (on you) and speed things up. > > I guess we'll need a clear process for this to work well. > E.g, refresh the branches (periodically? Once notified?), match expectations on their contents, make sure they are stable around pull time and etc. I think that we agreed that branches are going to be updated on constant basis. This operation process is the same as DaveM's methodology. I'm going to post pull-requests together with patches based on for-next Doug's tag. https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg168151.html The readers of this mailing list will see slightly different cover letter, but no other changes will be (they still see and discuss over patches posted on to the mailing list), while Doug will do something like: git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/saeed/linux.git tags/mlx5-fixes-2017-05-12-V2 into his tree and will get the whole series. So nothing to change, just update for-next, for-rc constantly and pull for-rc to for-next from time to time. Thanks > > Thanks, > Ram >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
