[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160331233828.GE2670@leon.nu>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 02:38:28 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...n.nu>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] Please pull rdma.git
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:37:54AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 03/23/2016 06:57 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 02:37:08PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> So the *best* situation would be:
> >>
> >> - your two groups talk it over, and figure out what the common commits are
> >>
> >> - you put those common commits as a "base" branch in git
> >>
> >> - you ask the two upper-level maintainers to both pull that base branch
> >>
> >> - you then make sure that you send the later patches (whether as
> >> emailed patches or as pull requests) based on top of that base branch.
> >
> > Hi David and Doug,
> >
> > Are you OK with the approach suggested by Linus?
> > We are eager to know it, so we will adopt it as soon
> > as possible in our development flow.
> >
> > The original thread [1].
> >
> > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.rdma/34907
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
>
> I'm fine with it. Since I happen to use topic branches to build my
> for-next from anyway, I might need to be the one that Dave pulls from
> versus the other way around.
Resending to linux-netdev.
David,
Can you please express your opinion about Linus's suggestion to
eliminate merge conflicts in Mellanox related products?
Thanks
>
> --
> Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
> GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists