Re: linux-next: merge fixups relative to the vfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sage,

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 15:16:39 -0800 (PST) Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That works, thanks.  I was planning on just making sure my tree got pulled 
> after the vfs tree, but this will work either way.

It looks like you added my patch to your tree, but did not merge Al's
write_inode branch.  So, I assume that your tree is currently broken if
built on its own.

> More generally, I'm not sure I understand how your fixups are supposed to 
> be used down the line.  Is whichever tree that caused the conflict to get 
> merged second supposed to pick it up in their branch to pull, or are those 
> patches being fed to Linus somehow, or does he usually fix up those 
> conflicts himself?

Yeah, either the second tree's owner will do the fixup after the first is
merged into Linus' tree or (more commonly for simple fixups), Linus will
do the fix when he merges the second tree.  In this particular case, the
conflicts are not noticed by git during the merge, so they need to be
done manually by the second tree's owner, or by Linus (if we tell him).

I will attempt to remember to warn Linus if these conflicts remain during
the next merge window but if you and JÃrn merge Al's branch and apply the
fix, then it will all be OK.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature