[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1202850043.3137.126.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:00:43 -0600
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 21:18 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> > > Rebases *do*not*work* (and fundamentally cannot work) in a
> > > distributed environment.
> > Hm ... I think net is a counter example to this. Rebases certainly work
> > for them. The issue, I thought, was around the policy of rebasing and
> > how often.
>
> Hmm ... as far as I can see, Jeff and John (i.e. net tree downstreams) are
> pretty loudly unhappy with Dave rebasing too often, right?
That's true ... but irrelevant to the argument of whether rebasing does
or doesn't work. I don't think anyone's arguing that rebasing doesn't
cause real problems to downstream users ... when I was based on block
for the scsi post merge tree, I was just such a user ...
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists