On 5 August 2013 18:00, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <t...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 10:53 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On 5 August 2013 10:44, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <t...@linaro.org> wrote:
>>         On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 17:13 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
>>
>>         > The whole list is good things to have I just wonder how
>>         ongoing
>>
>>         > updates will be handled for backport.  For example at some
>>         point
>>         > "Tweaks to the MCPM code which aren't upstream." will go
>>         upstream and
>>         > probably be a bit different by then, someone should
>>         "revert" (it may
>>         > not be that clean since other patches may have meddled) the
>>         old one in
>>         > lsk and "replace" with the upstream patches.  Mark's
>>         watching out for
>>         > that, or you are for the trees you merged that went into
>>         LSK, or
>>         > what's the plan?
>>
>>
>>
>>         Plan? There's no plan that I know of.
>>
>>
>> As was mentioned on linaro-kernel the plan is that you should be
>> sending me incremental updates as needed.
>
> But who decides what's needed? If what is in 3.10 works, why backport a
> different version? And I hadn't planned on spending any time on
> backporting new versions or fixes.

Often there are improvements from upstream comment inbetween the last
private drop of something and it appearing upstream.  That can just be
style or it can be better error handling or covering cases that
weren't originally obvious.  You won't literally always need to
backport the changes if it's removing a comment or something but
generally someone's going to at least have to eyeball the version that
went upstream and check nothing nasty got fixed before ignoring it.

More to the point there may need to be some kind of "traceability"
list for what fed LSK like the merged topics list you sent, and if
Mark expects someone to monitor those then an "owner" associated with
that as well (maybe you can pass the buck up to the component merge
branch author).  Otherwise with it being a "long term history branch"
pretty soon there will be so many patches piled on you'll have to do
git diff v3.10 --stat to try understand what's actually in there.

Somebody needs to follow the status of the contribution branch content
in terms of it went upstream now or it got rejected or it was redone
etc.

There won't be that many topic branches overall in LSK, so it should
be something that can stay under control if it's understood it needs
to be under control.

-Andy

_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Reply via email to