On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 8:24 PM, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Paul Moore wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 9:46 PM, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Wed, 8 Apr 2015, Paul Moore wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 6:57 AM, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2015, Paul Moore wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Removed the patch, it should now just contain the five patches described at >> >> >> the start, and shown again below. It's based again the current security#next >> >> >> branch so there should be no problems, at least there haven't been in my test >> >> >> pulls. >> >> > >> >> > Ok, I'll pull it on the weekend when I get back from PTO. >> >> >> >> Okay, thanks. When you get back I'd still be curious to hear how you >> >> manage the security tree; my process works *ok* but I'm always looking >> >> for new approaches that may work better. >> > >> > Currently I merge my next branch with Linus at -rc1 or -rc2, after >> > experimenting with other approaches. I pull into that from security >> > subsystems and push to Linus during the merge window. Do you need any >> > more info? Not sure what else there is to add. >> > >> > For urgent fixes, I branch from Linus current (e.g. for-linus) and use >> > that to push to Linus. This is a volatile branch which should not be >> > tracked. >> >> So no long running branches then? You simply recreate your next >> branch every release? > > The next branch is long running. I guess I misunderstood your merge with -rc1/-rc2 comment, I thought you meant you rebased at each -rc1/-rc2. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
