![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL) |
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:15:29PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
I used to play this game, it's a lot of work and it sucks. One
"drib" can require fixing up 200 patches down the chain. And
I've had this happen to me all the time in the past when I was
rebasing all the time.
I have to agree with Dave. Moreover, I used to get regular complaints about the old "regular rebase" process. We switched to a "pull and merge" process for 2.6.25, and in that period nearly all of the process-related complaints disappeared for me. Well. Have you ever been an hour and a half into a bisection at 3AM then hit a massive oops deep in the TCP code which was spread across a large number of commits? I have and it wasn't fun. iirc I gave up and went to bed. To some degree this is a "pick your poison" issue, and for most people
rebasing seems like the deadlier poison.
Well yes. We'd like the best of both worlds, only we cannot have it. And the sole _reason_ we cannot have it is due to restrictions in git <stimulate, stimulate>. | ||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-05-14 19:55 [W:1.730 / U:0.090 seconds] ©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||