Subject: RE: interdependencies with cxgb4 and iw_cxgb4

From: "Steve Wise" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:08:44 -0500

> >> > Let me ask a dumb question:� Why cannot one of the maintaners pull
> the
> >> > commit from the other mainainer's git repo directly?� IE why have
this
> >> > third trusted/signed git repo that has to be on k.o, from which both
> >> > maintainers pull?� If one of you can pull it in via a patch series,
> >> > like you do for all other patches, and then notify the other
> >> > maintainer to pull it from the first maintainers' repo if the series
> >> > meets the requirements that it needs to be in both maintainers'
> >> > repositories?� This avoids adding more staging git repos on k.o.� But
> >> > probably I'm missing something...
> >>
> >> Tree A may not want all of tree B's changes, and vice versa.
> >
> > I was thinking the special commit would go into a branch that was based
> on,
> > say rc1 or rc2 of one of the maintainers.  Then both maintainers pull
that
> > into their -next branch.  Would that work?
> 
> That makes things more complicated.

For the maintainers, yes.  But it avoids setting up k.o accounts and git
repos for each device driver maintainer that has this issue.

> 
> The simplest design is that "identical" commits end up in both the
> RDMA and the net-next tree.
> 
> Then it absolutely doesn't matter whose tree goes into Linus's first.
> 

Yes, and that would still be the case, from my understanding:  Instead of
each driver having a k.o. signed git repo, we ask the maintainers to stage
this common branch that both maintainers pull from into their -next
branches/repos.

> Also, we should not be merging "merge window" code after -rc1.  "-rc1"
> means the merge window is closed.

I meant using rc-1 for the current release when submitting these shared
commits for the _following merge window_.

Steve.