lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] kmemcheck: divide and conquer
    On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
    > a small workflow request: could you please start adding append-only
    > commits to that tree, if possible?

    Yes, I will.

    > it would be much better if you stopped rebasing kmemcheck from now on,
    > and did append-only updates only - that way i could pick up your updates
    > into tip/kmemcheck by doing pulls. It does not matter if the result
    > looks a bit messier - most of the fundamentals should be in place
    > already.

    I've created the "for-tip" branch which is (for now) just a copy of
    the current "current" branch. This branch ("for-tip") will henceforth
    NEVER be rebased.

    I won't guarantee this for the other branches, though; rebasing is
    really handy when the patch series is to be reviewed since it cuts
    down noise to the bare minimum, and avoids multiple changes to the
    same area of code (which is confusing to reviewers).

    I think I will append new commits to the "for-tip" branch, git-pull
    new kernel -rc releases, and rebase the result into a new branch (e.g.
    against-v2.6.26*). Now we have two heads which _should_ have exactly
    the same content, but where one retains a strictly incremental
    history, and the other is easy to read for reviewers. (And comparing
    them for differences is trivial; that's just a git-diff.)


    Vegard

    --
    "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
    the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
    disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
    -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-06-14 11:21    [W:0.024 / U:121.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site