On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
> out of curiosity, wouldn't be better to sync with Andrew via git?
> Why via plain patches?
> What am I missing?
I think you're just missing that we've become so used to it that it's just
easier than all the alternatives.
Also, the way we do things with Andrew actually has a few advantages over
a straight git-to-git merge. In particular, when Andrew sends me his
current stable quilt queue, every email is also Cc'd to the people who
sent it to him originally or were otherwise involved.
So the very act of transferring the patches from one tree to another
sometimes produces an extra acknowledgement cycle, and we've had patches
that got NACK'ed at that point because it was an older version of the
Now, I suspect this is more of an advantage with Andrew's tree than with
most other trees (most other trees tend to have a much stricter focus),
and perhaps equally importantly, it also wouldn't really work very well if
_everybody_ did it, so I personally believe this is one of those
situations where what's good for _one_ case may not actually be wonderful
for _all_ cases.
I think it's worked out pretty well, no?