netdev - RE: interdependencies with cxgb4 and iw

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 20 Mar 2018 08:47:04 -0500
From:   "Steve Wise" <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
To:     "'David Miller'" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     <rajur@...lsio.com>, <dledford@...hat.com>,
        <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <bharat@...lsio.com>,
        <ganeshgr@...lsio.com>, <rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com>
Subject: RE: interdependencies with cxgb4 and iw_cxgb4

> From: Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:50:57 -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?