Re: [alsa-devel] HG -> GIT migration

From: Rene Herman
Date: Wed May 21 2008 - 10:38:26 EST

On 21-05-08 15:48, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:

On Wed, 21 May 2008, Rene Herman wrote:

It's "worse" than that; rebasing is designed for a _private_ development model. git-rebase is a very handy tool for people like myself (people without a downstream that is) and it basically enables the quilt model of a stack of patches on top of git but public trees that have people pulling from them should generally not rebase or everyone who _is_ pulling finds a different tree each time.

I don't see big obstacles with this model. You can do changes in your local tree and when 'git pull' fails from the subsystem tree, pull new subsystem tree to a new branch and do rebasing in your local tree, too.

Rebasing can keep the subsystem tree more clean I think. It's only about to settle an appropriate workflow.

I'm also still frequently trying to figure out an/the efficient way of using GIT but it does seem it's not just a matter of "pure downstream" (which I do believe ALSA has few enough of to not make this be a huge problem). For example linux-next is also going to want to pull in ALSA and say it does, finds a trivial conflict with the trivial tree that it also pulls in and fixes things up. If you rebase that which linux-next pulls from I believe it will have to redo the fix next time it pulls from you since it's getting all those new changesets.

I guess this can be avoided by just not rebasing that which linux-next is pulling... and I in fact don't even know if linux-next does any conflict resolution itself, trivial or otherwise.


I'll see how things work out.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at