[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] at91: fist cleanup branch for 3.5
    On Sunday 22 April 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
    > There, I had this workflow:
    > * git fetch <url+branch from pull request>
    > * tig FETCH_HEAD (look at contents, sanity check, etc: If something
    > looks wrong there's no merge to undo)
    > * git checkout -b subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD to create the pulled-in
    > topic branch
    > * git checkout next/topic
    > * git pull --log <url+branch from pull request> to get the original
    > URL in the merge commit
    > Then the usual steps to get it into for-next and added to the contents file.

    Ok. I've now started skipping the 'checkout -b' step and just doing
    a 'git branch subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD', but the result is the same.

    > That way we do get the --log in the next/ branch as well as the tag
    > message, but only one merge changeset. It also has the benefit of
    > making it trivial to see when things have been merged with mainline
    > which branches can be pruned and not.
    > The only thing missing from that workflow is the authenticity of the
    > subarch/topic branch once it's done, in case there is tinkering with
    > the arm-soc repo by some third party. I don't think that's a big risk
    > since we tend to diff the for-next contents before and after a
    > rebuild, so any delta in file contents will be caught. Since each
    > branch is documented in arm-soc-for-next-contents, we should have all
    > bases covered there.

    I also catch changes to the branches when I update my tree.

    > I guess we could tag every subarch/topic tip as well, but it'll get
    > pretty noisy with all them in the main repo. We have the option of
    > pushing those to a separate repo instead of the main arm-soc.git if we
    > wanted though.

    The idea I've had before is to just keep tags for each subarch/topic
    instead of branches, which would seperate them from one another, and
    we could leave the message in the tag without it cluttering the history.

    The main disadvantage I see in that is that I don't have a good workflow
    for maintaining remote tags yet.


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-04-23 13:15    [W:0.022 / U:7.608 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site