lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    DateFri, 24 Apr 1998 11:42:17 -0700
    From"David S. Miller" <>
    SubjectRe: Linux-2.1.98..
       Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 11:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
       From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
    
       However:
        - not everybody uses it. At work, we force people to use it by mailing
          out the commit messages to an internal newsgroup, so everybody sees
          when a commit doesn't have a good message. Without that kind of
          pressure to write the message, the messages tend to be fairly bad, at
          least as far as I have seen.
    
    We are anal about it on the Vger tree.
    
        - the commit messages go into a big black hole, and never come back. You
          _can_ get at them, but you certainly don't get them easily, and you
          _definitely_ don't get them when you try to make a combination patch.
    
    Not true, if you know how to set up a CVS repository correctly, I have
    things hacked up on vger so this _DOES_ happen.  For all types of
    large combo patches etc, you can get the commit messages in there any
    way you like.
    
       It is non-trivial to get _only_ the changes that correspond to a certain
       series of commits, and to leave out the changes that everybody else have
       been doing. At least I haven't found anything to do anything like that. 
    
       In short, CVS is not _nearly_ good enough. Sorry,
    
    Ted T'so uses the technique on some of his tree's of creating a branch
    which is where most people play around, ever week or couple of weeks,
    a merge process is done by the people who have write access to the
    main line.
    
    I don't know how well it would work for us.
    
    Anyways, I've also been maintaining a 2.0.x stable branch on the tree
    actively and it seems to work rather well.  And some people who use
    vger create their own branches when they aren't totally confident
    about their changes, then after testing they merge their stuff into
    the main line and remove thier "temporary" branch.
    
    The EGCS folks have run into some issues with branching, and worked
    them out from what I can tell, maybe we can get some tips from them.
    
    Later,
    David S. Miller
    davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com
    
    
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    
    
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2008