[linux-cifs-client] Re: cp -p localfile to a winnt, w2k0, winxp server - and legacy servers like win98SE and OS/2 - does _not_ succeed. To get that tracked now, i'll open a samba bugzilla entry, too

[Suresh Jayaraman]

Steve French wrote:
> Starting to catchup now.   I like the idea of having a devel branch
> that anyone could push to but not sure the easiest way to handle this.


Yeah, I think it is a good idea to have a devel branch. I can think of 
two approaches which might be suitable.

1. We could have a shared central repository where multiple developers 
can push changes (via SSH) to devel branch. But those primary developers 
will need to have SSH access. An sample workflow:

- Developer clones the repo and setup a local working branch
- Developer makes changes and tests, gets it reviewed, sign-off
- Developer prepares a branch to push
     * switches to that branch
     * git format patch (redirect as a file)
     * git applymbox
- Developer pushes changes via SSH to the devel branch (Rebase if required)
- Delete the branch which was pushed, once we're done with it

Note: we need to make sure we are pushing only the prepared branch and 
not master (explicitly specify the local and the remote branch)

2. Alternatively, as Jeff hinted, developers can have their own public 
hosted trees and once the feature/work is completed/tested/reviwed 
developers can request for a pull. The responsibility of keeping their 
tree up-to-date with the Maintainer's tree lies with the developers.

Thoughts? Comments?


Thanks,

> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 6:02 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 05:55:34 +0200
>> G�nter Kukkukk <linux at kukkukk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I post that here - so it's not going to be forgotten.
>>>
>>> Again and again there are posts to many mailing lists,
>>> that cifs vfs is handling timestamps improperly.
>>> Regarding legacy servers, special copy operations just fail.
>>> (the todays smbfs vs. cifs legacy problem)
>>>

>>> All this is "a known cifs failure" for weeks now - Jeff Layton
>>> has prepared a (large) patch to "cleanup the cifs_setattr()"
>>> stuff - and I'm waiting to post more legacy functionality.
>>>
>>> ... but nothing happens ...
>>>
>>> A really sad situation, when realizing that even the samba
>>> smbfs helpers smbmount, smbmnt and smbumount have now been
>>> removed in 3.2.x.
>>>
>>> Cheers, G�nter
>>
>> Hi G�nter,
>>
>> I think Steve is on holiday this week (it's summer holiday season here
>> in the US). I think he's waiting for 2.6.26 to be released before
>> committing more patches. IMO, If you have patches you're just sitting
>> on, then go ahead and post them and just make it clear that they depend
>> on other, uncommitted patches. I'm working on some other things too and
>> I'd like to make sure what I'm doing doesn't conflict with your work
>> (or anyone else's), and that we're not duplicating each others efforts.
>>
>> As a side note, it might be nice if Steve had a "devel" branch in his
>> git tree for stuff intended for the next release so that development
>> could more easily continue during the mainline -rc phases. Of course, I
>> need to get to work on a hosted git tree of my own as well ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat.com>



-- 
Suresh Jayaraman