Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 06:14:48PM +0300, Peter Lemenkov wrote: Hello. I've got an interesting idea - why not to provide a git repository with the sources of current Fedora kernel? This could simplify the maintenance of patches, allows other to easily backport stuff from kernel.org's master and greatly improves the current situation with transparency of development process. It is fully transparent already. Moving to another model like this would actually likely be a regression in transparency, since changes would be hidden by the increased volume of rebases or merges. I mean I almost sure that Fedora Kernel team uses git internally, so why not to allow others to fork it? Because we're not interested in doing additional work for no benefit. Our workflow is an SRPM of patches, so that's what we work with. Anything else just adds needless complication, and worst of all, increases the possibility of introducing issues. The goal of the Fedora kernel is to stay as close to upstream as possible, aside from a few outliers, we generally do a very good job of that. --Kyle -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
2011/2/27 Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca: Our workflow is an SRPM of patches, so that's what we work with. You really do that by hand, without some sort of patch manager? -- Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmail.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 08:32:34AM -0800, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: Fedora's patched kernel sources in a git repository and then include kernel-2.6.38-1.1.fc15.tar.bz2 in the source RPM instead of vanilla kernel-2.6.38.tar.bz2 and fifty patches. Red Hat appears to do this with RHEL 6's kernel, but their kernel repository is not publicly-accessible. RHEL also never rebases, which means their git tree is virtually linear. While I can see how this might make things a bit easier, it can obscure what commits are Fedora-specific as they are lost in the sea of the upstream kernel's commits, making me firmly against the proposal. Correct, look at, for instance, what Ubuntu's git tree looks like during a release, it's an utter mess of merges and local commits. There are advantages to both, with a low patch count, I'm happy with the workflow we have now. --Kyle -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
On Feb 27, 2011, at 1:19 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote: On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 08:32:34AM -0800, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: Fedora's patched kernel sources in a git repository and then include kernel-2.6.38-1.1.fc15.tar.bz2 in the source RPM instead of vanilla kernel-2.6.38.tar.bz2 and fifty patches. Red Hat appears to do this with RHEL 6's kernel, but their kernel repository is not publicly-accessible. RHEL also never rebases, which means their git tree is virtually linear. I'd say its not even virtually linear, its linear, period. Once a given RHEL major release goes out the door, the kernel tree is never branched or rebased, no git merges, or anything, just a series of linear commits, all done by a single maintainer. Patches aren't pulled from sub-maintainer git trees, they're pulled from a patchwork database, once deemed ready, so the commit history remains 100% linear. -- Jarod Wilson ja...@wilsonet.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
Hello. I've got an interesting idea - why not to provide a git repository with the sources of current Fedora kernel? This could simplify the maintenance of patches, allows other to easily backport stuff from kernel.org's master and greatly improves the current situation with transparency of development process. I mean I almost sure that Fedora Kernel team uses git internally, so why not to allow others to fork it? -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
Hi, 2011/2/25 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com: Hello. I've got an interesting idea - why not to provide a git repository with the sources of current Fedora kernel? This could simplify the maintenance of patches, allows other to easily backport stuff from kernel.org's master and greatly improves the current situation with transparency of development process. I mean I almost sure that Fedora Kernel team uses git internally, so why not to allow others to fork it? git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/kernel -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- Best regards, Michal http://eventhorizon.pl/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
On 2/25/2011 7:19, Michał Piotrowski wrote: I've got an interesting idea - why not to provide a git repository with the sources of current Fedora kernel? This could simplify the maintenance of patches, allows other to easily backport stuff from kernel.org's master and greatly improves the current situation with transparency of development process. I mean I almost sure that Fedora Kernel team uses git internally, so why not to allow others to fork it? git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/kernel That repository has the spec file and build files; he means using git for the kernel sources themselves. Rather than keeping a stack of patches and porting them forward all the time, one can instead keep Fedora's patched kernel sources in a git repository and then include kernel-2.6.38-1.1.fc15.tar.bz2 in the source RPM instead of vanilla kernel-2.6.38.tar.bz2 and fifty patches. Red Hat appears to do this with RHEL 6's kernel, but their kernel repository is not publicly-accessible. While I can see how this might make things a bit easier, it can obscure what commits are Fedora-specific as they are lost in the sea of the upstream kernel's commits, making me firmly against the proposal. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: git repository with Fedora kernel(s) sources
2011/2/25 Garrett Holmstrom gho...@fedoraproject.org: While I can see how this might make things a bit easier, it can obscure what commits are Fedora-specific as they are lost in the sea of the upstream kernel's commits, making me firmly against the proposal. Using topgit to control the Fedora patches would be an option, essentially creating a topic branch for each of these patches (and recording their dependencies). I have no clue however if that scales well to ~90 patches. -- Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmail.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
