[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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean