Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758133AbZJFRpu (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:45:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757675AbZJFRpt (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:45:49 -0400 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:40896 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757333AbZJFRps (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:45:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:44:50 -0400 From: Theodore Tso To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Dirk Hohndel , Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3 Message-ID: <20091006174450.GC24677@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Dirk Hohndel , Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <1254797502.14122.146.camel@dhohndel-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com> <20091006144449.GA23078@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2332 Lines: 68 On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 08:42:18AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Now, that's not actually true, because (a) people rebase and (b) even in > the absense of rebases I do merge with people like Andrew by email, so we > actually end up having statistics like these: > > 32 SUBLEVEL = 29 > 383 SUBLEVEL = 30 > 8795 SUBLEVEL = 31 > 1 SUBLEVEL = 32 > > which is actually a bit sad in itself (showing just _how_ many people > rebased their work on top of a release), but is still showing that we > actually had 32 new commits in there that were based on a 2.6.29 kernel It's actually not quite so bad. If you take into account Extraversion, the stats that you get look like this[1]: 4 29-rc2 28 29-rc8 331 30 4 30-rc2 48 30-rc5 3867 31 561 31-rc1 895 31-rc2 190 31-rc3 278 31-rc4 1245 31-rc5 521 31-rc6 515 31-rc7 387 31-rc8 336 31-rc9 1 32-rc2 That actually shows that well over half of the commit based off of 2.6.31 were actually based off of some 2.6.31-rc release, based on something *before* 2.6.31 released. Of the 3867 that were based on something between 2.6.31 and 2.6.31-rc1, that may be explained by people (like me) who will do a test merge, and if the test merge has conflicts, prefer to resolve the conflicts via a rebase and a re-run of the regression test suite, as opposed to either (a) having the upstream maintainer (you) do handle the merge, or (b) having two merges in the history; one merge by the maintainer to resolve the merge conflict, and another by the upstream maintainer when they pull in the topic branch. Some (probably small percentage of the commits based on something between 2.6.31 and 2.6.31-rc1 can probably be explained by on bug fixes after an initial merge, but granted that's probably a pretty small set. - Ted \[1] Generated using: git rev-list v2.6.31..v2.6.32-rc1 | while read a do git show $a:Makefile | head -4 > /tmp/foo awk '/^SUBLEVEL/ {printf("%s", $3)}; /^EXTRAVERSION/ {print $3}' < /tmp/foo done | sort | uniq -c -- 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/