Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 12:02:05 +0200 From: Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-git@FreeBSD.org Subject: OpenZFS branch tracking policy Message-ID: <21c7313e-315c-ec48-9437-e0a3d4ec14d2@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear git working group, OpenZFS 2.1 is approaching and there is an ongoing discussion between=20 the ZFS developers regarding branch tracking. What we want archieve: FreeBSD main will be tracking the master branch of openzfs/zfs FreeBSD stable/13 will be tracking the zfs-2.1-release and upcoming=20 staging branches of openzfs/zfs (they always have continuous commits) At the moment, I rsync changes from openzfs/zfs to our vendor/openfzfs=20 and commit them. The question is, if this is the correct way to do this? OpenZFS uses git so we might skip vendor/openzfs and subtree merge=20 directly from openzfs/master (and that way inherit all OpenZFS history)=20 and openzfs/zfs-2.1-release. That would be way easier to manage and we=20 can track and see "real" commits from OpenZFS. The other way would be like now, keep two vendor branches and rsync, but = that makes it harder to track. I would be really happy for a decision so I can start merging=20 zfs-2.1-release. Best regards, mm
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21c7313e-315c-ec48-9437-e0a3d4ec14d2>