[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] structuring of tools et.al and linux-devel.git repo
joe at perches.com
Tue Jun 19 18:22:18 UTC 2012
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 11:04 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 13:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > 2) Creating a linux-devel.git repo
> > >
> > > Some of the discussion so far has been about code getting into Linus's
> > > tree without going through linux-next. Or changing between the two. I
> > > would like to suggest adding a linux-devel.git repo that would let
> > > anyone that requests to add their development code to this repo. It may
> > > even spot duplicate work that is going on, or a place to house competing
> > > projects where it will be easier to do comparisons.
> > I'm not sure there's really a need for another
> > aggregate tree prior to Linus' that is unchangeable.
> > -next is today effectively -devel.
> It shouldnt' be.
> > Reverts aren't _that_ painful and
> > contain useful history showing what works and
> > what doesn't.
> and breaks bisecting.
> I constantly rebase my work before I push it public, so that I have a
> nice bisectable history. I have branches that last for a year, that
> basically works, but still is being tweaked upon. Just not 'ready for
> mainline' bit.
Well, perhaps git bisect could just be smarter
about bisecting with reverted commits.
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss