Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750743AbVKJJ5c (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 04:57:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750741AbVKJJ5c (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 04:57:32 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:20716 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750743AbVKJJ5b (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 04:57:31 -0500 Message-ID: <43731980.3020802@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 04:57:20 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Jens Axboe , James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, bcollins@debian.org, scjody@modernduck.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, rolandd@cisco.com, davej@codemonkey.org.uk, shaggy@austin.ibm.com, sfrench@us.ibm.com Subject: git branches strategy (was Re: merge status) References: <20051109133558.513facef.akpm@osdl.org> <1131573041.8541.4.camel@mulgrave> <1131575124.8541.9.camel@mulgrave> <20051109150141.0bcbf9e3.akpm@osdl.org> <20051110084025.GW3699@suse.de> <20051110005653.3cb2c90f.akpm@osdl.org> <20051110092241.GY3699@suse.de> <20051110013055.77120a56.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20051110013055.77120a56.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bad-Reply: References and In-Reply-To but no 'Re:' in Subject. X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2030 Lines: 50 Andrew Morton wrote: > Most of the other git-tree maintainers don't bother with any of that. > acpi, agp, alsa, arm, ... xfs. The trees which have special -mm branches > are just drm, ieee1394, jfs, mips and netdev. [related tangent, in case this is useful to others] It's not quite correct to say that I have a special -mm branch. In my two primary work areas, libata-dev.git and netdev-2.6.git, I have a bunch of branches, which fall into three categories: 'master': vanilla upstream Linus tree themes: various patch queues, each for a single purpose. standard patch queues include... upstream: stuff queued for upstream upstream-fixes: stuff queued for -rc 8139-thread: example non-upstream dev branch ncq: another non-upstream dev branch 'ALL': a superset merge of all theme branches which are considered OK for testing by brave users. The 'ALL' superset branch is not only what you (Andrew) pull into -mm, its also the basis for -libataN and -netdevN patches, and in general the best way for users to slurp "all the useful bits." Using theme branches and a superset branch allows for maximum parallel development -- even applying conflicting patches -- and then using git to merge them together. The separated-out branches also allow for fine-grained selection of the material to push upstream, i.e. no false dependencies, easier cherrypicking. I've actually worked this way since the early BitKeeper days; BK didn't make it easy for me to export the tons of local theme branches I manipulated, just the superset branch. Since git makes it easy, you finally get the full picture of libata/netdev development, and the best of both worlds: both a superset branch (easy testing) and theme branches (parallel development). Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/