[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: linux-next: current pending merge fix patches
    Hi Ingo,

    On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 09:10:21 +0100 Ingo Molnar <> wrote:
    > > This could also be taken as a reminder to the respective maintiners that
    > > they may want to do a merge of your tree before asking you to pull theirs.
    > I dont think that's generally correct for trivial conflicts: it's better if
    > Linus does the merge of a tree that is based in some stable tree.

    In general I agree. I have singled out these conflict resolutions
    because they involve either files not obvious from the conflicts (newly
    introduced or chunks of code moved between files), or chunks of code that
    are introduced in one tree but need to be modified after the otheris
    merged. So in that sense they are a heads up to Linus because they are
    only found after you do the merge and then get a build failure (if you do
    the right builds).

    So they can be resolved by Linus after he merges the second tree or by
    the original maintainer of one of the trees merging/cherrypicking (part
    of) the other tree or waiting for Linus to merge the other tree and then
    do a merge with Linus' tree.
    Stephen Rothwell
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-01 09:57    [W:0.019 / U:12.912 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site