On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 11:40 -0700, David Miller wrote:

From: Robert Love <redacted>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:27:28 -0700

quoted

Please don't apply this patch to net-next. The other 4 patches in this
series should be fine without it. If this patch is applied to net-next
it means that most/all of the other fcoe features (that will go through
linux-scsi) become dependent on this patch.

I was hoping to push the other fcoe features as-is and then push this
patch through linux-scsi after the other 4 patches in this series had
been merged by you.

Sure, I was just reading over this stuff.

But on the other hand, linux-scsi will be dependant upon net-next-2.6
because this patch here uses flags that will only be added there.

Yes, absolutely, but it's only this small patch that creates the
dependency. I figured that all of the other fcoe patches could go into
James' scsi-misc tree and get merged first. Then this one could go into
his scsi-post-merge tree and depend on net-next.

It's really up to you and James, I just thought that would be easier.

Therefore there has to be a dependency in one direction or another,
the question is which one works better for you FCOE guys.

The best thing to do in these situations is usually to create the
dependency and merge into the tree where most of the subsystem
specific bits (and thus developer ACKs) are needed.  And then
just occaisionally go and ask the other subsystem guys for ACKs
when necessary.

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel