[openfabrics-ewg] drop mthca from svn?

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 23:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

> I agree. However most users really want a stale kernel - so
> we really should take bugfixes from 2.6.18 and backport to 2.6.17.x
> and 2.6.16.x. I might do this eventually - but I'm too busy now.
> Our backport patches in OFED also solve this, in another way.

On aperipherally related note, the way that code is organised in the
current OFED 1.1 git tree is not a model of clarity.

As far as I can tell, you took a git snapshot at some point, then
started copying some select files from SVN in there, hacked on various
bits and pieces, did merges with bits from upstream, and simultaneously
developed both backport and fix patches.  The result is a hodgepodge of
code, the history and state of which is tricky to follow.

This makes downstream work with the OFED tree quite difficult, as I
don't have any well-understood base to check against, and I have to
switch between git and my own local tools frequently.

If you were to maintain all of your changes as a series of patches
against a (preferably well-known, such as "a recent RC") revision of a
pristine kernel repository, this would be much easier to track and
manipulate.

The nice thing about a series of patches is that it's easy to rebase and
portable across a variety of revision control systems.  You can use
quilt, Mercurial Queues, StGit, or just plain patch depending on your
particular religion.

	<b