Re: [linuxsh-dev] Drop-In tree updates

[Tom R. <tr...@ke...>]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:44:34PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-12-06 at 20:41, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> 
> > Ideal stuation would be like that (fully compatible and fully
> > synchronized), but there are some parts which is not, _always_.
> > Sometimes, we have to maintain the differences, say, a year or so to
> > get merged.  It's unwise, well, quite impractical to ignore the
> > existence of diversion.  If it's really being synched, there is no
> > sence to have SH repository, in the first place.
> 
> I disagree.  I think in an ideal world, we would not diverge at all. 
> But we can't honestly expect to develop in sync with Linus and the x86
> arch so we have to work separately.  Having a CVS repository exists to
> make the job easier; nothing else.

Er, having an $(ARCH) tree makes sure that said $(ARCH) actually has a
useable tree.  It's always good to try and sync up with
Linus/Marcelo/Alan, but you don't want to be sending every diff to them
either.  In the ideal world, kernel.org works for the 95% case for
$(ARCH) and gets updated from the community tree.

> Maintaining a divergent tree makes things harder on everyone.  It makes
> syncing on our end harder.  It causes changes to the kernel with no
> regard to what we are doing (since no one knows). Etc etc ...

It depends on just how divergent.  The sparc tree has some very
different code from time to time than what Linus does, and it either
gets merged or tossed.  Same deal for the PPC _devel tree.  If you put a
comment (or a msg or two to a relevant list) people know or can figure
it out.

> What sort of problem does someone sending a diff off to Linus and
> Marcelo cause?  It makes our "drop in" tree smaller and our resyncing
> easy.

You can't just 'send off a diff', you need to create it, test it a bit,
and hope it doesn't cause any problems.  And then that
Linus/Marcelo/Alan doesn't loose it in a flood of other patches/emails.

> Well, CML2 is going in 2.5 in a release or two.  Eric Raymond
> specifically says SH is out of sync -- and is the only thing out of sync
> -- at the maintainers request that he do it himself.  We won't work in
> 2.5 until this is fixed.

Working in 2.5 is a non-issue for the moment.  2.5 won't work on x86 for 
a while. Hell, I imagine it'll take a while before Linus doesn't drop 
other arch patches on the floor.

-- 
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/