[GIT PULL] Security subsystem updates for 4.14
jmorris at namei.org
Sun Sep 10 04:32:03 UTC 2017
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Paul Moore wrote:
> > This is also why I tend to prefer getting multiple branches for
> > independent things.
> Is it time to start sending pull request for each LSM and thing under
> security/ directly? I'm not sure I have a strong preference either
> way, I just don't want to see the SELinux changes ignored during the
> merge window.
They won't be ignored, we just need to get this issue resolved now and
figure out how to implement multiple branches in the security tree.
Looking at other git repos, the x86 folk have multiple branches.
One option for me would be to publish the trees I pull from as branches
along side mine, with 'next' being a merge of all of directly applied
patchsets and those ready for Linus to pull as one.
So, branches in
next-selinux (Paul's next branch)
next-apparmor-next (JJ's next branch)
next (merge all of the above to here)
That way, we have a coherent 'next' branch for people to develop against
and to push to Linus, but he can pull individual branches feeding into it
if something is broken in one of them.
Does that sound useful?
<jmorris at namei.org>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive