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

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Wed May 21 2008 - 12:17:00 EST

On Wed, 21 May 2008, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> But, this means that the fixes done outside the subsystem tree cannot
> be in the subsystem tree itself until the next release. It's a pretty
> weird situation.

No it is NOT.

Why should you have stuff from outside the subsystem tree?

And quite frankly, the only reason to *need* those fixes in the first
place is if you merge random test-kernels during the merge window. What
you should strive for is to merge at the stable point, not random kernels
to keep you "up-to-date", and suddenly you don't need to make more merges
just to get (possibly) new fixes.


If it's the ALSA tree, then what is it doing pulling all the random other
stuff that I merge?

In other words - merging my random stuff, THAT is the "weird situation".
You should be doing ALSA development, not "random kernel" development.

> The method Linus suggested is suitable for random patches like tirival
> tree, but apparently not for every case.

Umm. Bigger subsystems than ALSA are successfully using it and have no
problems, and don't think they need to merge backwards:

[torvalds@woody linux]$ git rev-list v2.6.25.. drivers/net/ | wc -l
[torvalds@woody linux]$ git rev-list v2.6.25.. sound/ | wc -l

iow, the only reason you seem to think that you need to merge more is that
you merged too much, or from a too-unstable base, to begin with.

Aim for basing things on releases, or at least for merging just at stable
points (and only when you *need* to, and it will make your life much
easier. And the history will automatically be cleaner and less confusing.

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