Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753143AbZJWTfP (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:35:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753134AbZJWTfM (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:35:12 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:54629 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753050AbZJWTfJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:35:09 -0400 Subject: [RFC] to rebase or not to rebase on liunx-next From: Steven Rostedt Reply-To: rostedt@goodmis.org To: LKML Cc: Ingo Molnar , Nicolas Pitre , "Luck, Tony" , Stephen Rothwell , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Jeff Garzik , Robert Richter , Dmitry Torokhov , Jean Delvare , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <20091023191631.GA1879@elte.hu> References: <20091020034829.GA12833@elte.hu> <20091020140750.GH11972@erda.amd.com> <20091022122042.e535d43c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20091023112732.GB5886@elte.hu> <4AE19A74.1090709@garzik.org> <20091023123555.GA25366@elte.hu> <57C9024A16AD2D4C97DC78E552063EA3E33D0174@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> <20091023134115.GD27097@elte.hu> <20091023191631.GA1879@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Kihon Technologies Inc. Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:35:12 -0400 Message-Id: <1256326512.26028.34.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1872 Lines: 50 This is an email attempt to move a thread from users.kernel.org to LKML where it belongs. I've tried to Cc all those that were on the original Cc (sorry if you don't want to be, but just send this to /dev/null in that case). Here's the basic gist, some people believe that linux-next is used as a dumping ground for their repos that get rebased all the time. They use linux-next for early testing, and mostly to make sure their repo will not collide with other developers repos. Some of the reasons for the constant rebasing are: 1) the patches are held in quilt, which just by nature leads to rebasing. These developers find that quilt is the best tool for the job. 2) after collisions with other repos, the developers find other ways to to solve the issue, and rebase it instead of having a bunch of "merged" conflicts go off to Linus. 3) They want acks and reviewed-by labels added. Which would cause a rebase because the commit must change to add these. 4) Major bugs are found and bisectablity is broken. Rebasing would keep the git history working for bisecting. I'm sure there are other reasons, please feel free to add your own, or to refute the ones I listed. Other developers feel that there's too much rebasing going on in linux-next and that there should be a cleaner work-flow. Perhaps have maintainers test their work a bit more before passing it off to linux-next? This is not a complete description of what is going on, but it gets the idea across. Now those of you that want to argue this, go ahead. But use this email as the starting point and keep it off of users.kernel.org Thanks, -- Steve -- 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/