xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ANNOUNCE, DISCUSS] xfsprogs: libxfs-4.1-update branch created

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE, DISCUSS] xfsprogs: libxfs-4.1-update branch created
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 07:28:05 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5550C123.8060806@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20150511000508.GD16689@dastard> <5550C123.8060806@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 09:48:03AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 5/10/15 7:05 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> 
> ...
> 
> > This userspace update work needs to
> > be distributed over the developers making the API and functionality
> > changes, so I'm throwing this out there to see what people think
> > about solving this problem.
> 
> ...
> 
> > So, what do the people I'm asking to do more work so I don't have
> > to spend so much time on time consuming maintenance tasks think?
> 
> I think it makes perfect sense, and I'm happy to do it.  The giant
> sync-ups after the fact have never been ideal from any perspective.
> 
> I'm glad you brought this up; I don't think anyone ever meant to simply
> leave this to the maintainer - it just ended up that way, because the
> rules or best practices weren't necessarily clear.

*nod*

> So; do you envision a 0/8 patch series, 4 of which touch libxfs, to
> now be a 0/12 patch series, with the userspace bits i.e. at the end?
> I'd be perfectly happy with this; once libxfs stays up to date in
> userspace, it should be trivial.

I'd expect separate patch series, because it's kinda hard to do a
git send-email or guilt patchbomb that spans mutltiple
repositories.... :P

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>