[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080213103641.GD12785@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 05:36:41 -0500
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jeff@...zik.org,
arjan@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 10:16:53PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> I was amazed at how slow stgit was when I tried it out. I use
> git-quiltimport a lot and I don't think it's any slower than just using
> quilt on its own. So I think that the speed issue should be the same.
I like using "guilt" because I can easily reapply the patchset using
"guilt push -a", which is just slightly fewer characters to type than
"git-quiltimport". This also means that I don't need to switch back
and forth between "git mode" and "quilt mode" when I'm editing the
patches (either directly by editing the patch files, in which case
afterwards I do a "guilt pop -a; guilt push -a", or by using "guilt
pop", "guilt push", and "guilt refresh").
"guilt push -a" is a little bit slower than "quilt push -a", but not
enough to be seriously annoying. And besides, "guilt pop -a" is
slightly faster than "quilt pop -a".
Using guilt is also nice because there is a bit of additional backup
for previous work via the git reflogs, although to be honest I've
rarely needed to use it.
- Ted
--
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