[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

Jeff Layton jlayton at redhat.com
Tue Jul 29 12:20:28 GMT 2008


On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:34:57 +0530
Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman at suse.de> wrote:

> 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,
> 

My preference would be for #2 here. I'm working on getting a public
git tree, but it may be a bit before I get it going. It'll probably
also take me a bit to get the workflow down correctly, etc.

Either way though, it's clear that we need to change our development
model some. The 2.6.27 merge window just closed, and very few of the
patches that were queued up before it opened have been merged.

It's not really possible to get these patches reviewed and merged into
Steve's tree and then get them pushed to mainline in the short merge
window. Ideally, we'd have them all in a branch ready to be pulled into
mainline when the merge window opens.

Having a devel branch would also expand testing of these patches, and
give us good way to get them into linux-next.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat.com>


More information about the linux-cifs-client mailing list