Le 13/11/2017 à 11:41, Leon Romanovsky a écrit : > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:16:32AM +0100, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: >> >> Le 13/11/2017 à 09:14, Leon Romanovsky a écrit : >>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 08:53:19AM +0100, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: >>>> What would make sense IMHO would be to have people submit their patches to stable branches through a github issues. >>>> Each issue should be tagged in all the main/stable release it is in and contains a SHA1 to a patch from master that contains a fix. >>>> >>> I personally against such close integration with github and creating two >>> different places for communication (ML and github), but as Jason said, >>> the core team has no plans to manage it and it will be your decision on >>> how you will manage it. >>> >>> Right now, the gihtub issues are disabled in rdma-core, because we >>> didn't want people open bug reports there instead of posting to the ML. >>> >>> Thanks >> >> I just saw that on Github. And yes people will open bug for master there. >> I don't want to intrude in your workflow.. > Feel free "to intrude", I'm not alone here. Well from my review of v15, the amount of work at the moment seems very reasonable. So I dont think there is a need to intrude ... yet ! > >> I'm OK with keeping just the ML for the moment. If it becomes too much of a mess, I'll come back with my github request (or something else). >> How do you suggest flagging me for those patches ? Should we follow the kernel stable process ? > I think so, the kernel process works, we just need to adapt it to rdma-core. > Regarding the flagging procedure, we can do like Greg and Sasha do. > > Open email account (e.g. stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx), connect it to /dev/null, > so people won't get bounce emails while they sent patches to it, and > once a week or two run script [1], which will check master branch and > cherry-pick patches with Cc: stable@ in their commit messages. > > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sashal/stable-tools.git/tree/ Sounds fine to me. >> Meaning either: >> - CC me with version information on a submission to master >> - Send a mail to ML + me after patch has been accepted in master with a tag like [PATCH rdma-core stable], a list of patch-id from master, the version they apply to and why they should be picked >> >> Do you have any request/idea/suggestion about the release rate of the stable branch ? > I don't have. Apart from distros, are there people interested in stable branches ? If not, we could release simply release around the same time a new main release comes out (N.1 comes out at the same time as N+1.0), and on-demand when a distro requires it. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
