Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:38:38 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Boris Kolpackov <boris@codesynthesis.com>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
        Patrick Franz <patfra71@gmail.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kconfig as a git subtree on Linux
Message-ID: <20201126153838.GL4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
References: <20201125172544.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <boris.20201126122203@codesynthesis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <boris.20201126122203@codesynthesis.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 12:38:41PM +0200, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > I'd like to propose we discuss the possibility of taking kconfig and
> > making it a git subtree under the Linux kernel. This would allow
> > other projects outside of the Linux kernel to be able to update their
> > own copy / fork of kconfig in a jiffie *very* easily.
> 
> I am maintaining one such copy/fork[1] and for me the effort to pull
> in the new version of upstream (which I currently do by just copying
> scripts/kconfig/*) is nothing compared to the effort of maintaining
> a set of patches[2] on top of that which are necessary to make kconfig
> buildable on other platforms and usable with other build systems.
> 
> So unless there is also an agreement that such portability patches
> are now welcome, this is not going to be a major improvement for me.

Unless you have tried git subtrees, I doubt you really mean this. How
is a 'make refresh' command as comparable as manually pulling in
changes from a project to your project?

> And right now such patches are clearly not welcome[3] (but no hard
> feelings; I wouldn't touch Windows with a ten-foot pole if I could
> help it).

Portability of kconfig to other platorm is a topic of its own. If that
sort of conversation can exist, I think it would have to be *secondary*
to deciding whether or not kconfig lives on its own to allow other
Linux projects to benefit from it.

  Luis