Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937273AbZDDBVZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:21:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763636AbZDDBVQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:21:16 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:43625 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763471AbZDDBVP (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:21:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 18:19:08 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Felix Blyakher cc: Linus Torvalds , Lachlan McIlroy , Andrew Morton , LKML , xfs mailing list Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] XFS update for 2.6.30 In-Reply-To: <8A177E56-84E9-487E-930E-9C6805E17184@sgi.com> Message-ID: References: <20090331053013.7642414167108@attica.americas.sgi.com> <8A177E56-84E9-487E-930E-9C6805E17184@sgi.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3056 Lines: 80 On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Felix Blyakher wrote: > On Apr 3, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Felix Blyakher wrote: >>>> >>>> Were there any problems pulling from the xfs repository? >>> >>> Sorry, no - just too much email, too many trees to look at, too many >>> people to argue with. >>> >>> Pulled. >> >> Side note - I almost unpulled afterwards. > > That was my concern, i.e. it's not pulled without explicit > NAK. I knew about your possible concerns. > >> You've done several apparently totally useless pulls from my tree at >> random points. > > Yes, I noticed that, and agree with all your points even > before you brought them up. > I already started talking to people to improve my process. > The reason the intermediate pulls from your tree were done > is to make sure that new xfs patches would not conflict > with some other changes already in the mainline. That was > part of the maintainer cheat sheet given to me, and I > didn't realize the side effects of it. > I probably can verify the possible conflicts without pushing > the merges into the repository and reset the working tree to > pre pull state. create a temporary branch and do the merge in that. then throw away the test branch and there is no harm to the main tree. David Lang > At any rate, I'll find some way to manage that without > cluttering the history with the merges. > Any suggestions are welcome. > > Thanks, > Felix > >> >> >> Daily "keep up-to-date with Linus' tree" pulls are _strongly_ discouraged >> (read: if this continues, I'll just stop pulling from you), because it >> makes the history totally unreadable after-the-fact. It has some direct >> technical downsides (it makes it much harder to run "git bisect" and see >> what is going on), but apart from those direct downsides it just makes it >> much harder for me - or anybody else who wants to get an overview of what >> happened - to visualize things when history is messy. >> >> Instead of having a clear nice line of development that says "this is what >> happened to XFS", those merges have basically mixed up all your changes >> with all the random _other_ changes in the tree. >> >> In other words, having those extra merges makes the graphical tools almost >> useless for getting some kind of "what happened" overview. >> >> I realize that an occasional back-merge may be required to resolve big >> conflicts early, but they really have to be pretty big and immediate for >> it to be a win. >> >> Linus > > -- > 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/ -- 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/