[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: GIT and the current -stable
    On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Chris Wright wrote:

    > * Brian Gernhardt ( wrote:
    >> On Apr 14, 2007, at 4:34 AM, Chris Wright wrote:
    >>> I've already put a tree like this up on The master branch
    >>> is Linus' tree, and there's branches for each of the stable releases
    >>> called linux-2.6.[12-20].y (I didn't add 2.6.11.y).
    >> Is HEAD for that repo the most recent stable branch, or (as gitweb
    >> makes it look) Linus's head. I'd expect a "-stable" repo to point at
    >> the most recent stable commit, not the most recent development
    >> commit. And I'd also expect gitweb's summary page to show the
    >> shortlog for HEAd. One of my assumptions are being broken and I
    >> don't like it. It leaves me all confused...
    > As I mentioned. The master branch (HEAD) is Linus' tree, and each
    > stable tree is on its own branch. You'll find shortlog summarizes the
    > main branch, so yes, gitweb's summary is a bit confusing based on your
    > assumptions. This is a new tree and hasn't been publicized until now.
    > It does make sense to have its head be the newest stable, I'll switch
    > that around.

    Would it not make more sense to point HEAD at the linux-2.6.20-y branch
    and either let master be Linus' tree or simply not have a master branch?
    Otherwise, what happens to master when the latest stable tree becomes


    Most people want either less corruption or more of a chance to
    participate in it.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-14 21:31    [W:0.021 / U:1.276 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site