linux-kernel - Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080212.165014.01238510.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:50:14 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	bfields@...ldses.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linville@...driver.com
Subject: Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:07:07 -0800 (PST)

> 
> 
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > 
> > But the "author" is still preserved, right?  Why do you need the
> > committer name to be preserved?  (I'm not denying that there could be
> > reasons, I'm just curious what they are.)
> 
> It's not that the committer should be preserved, but:
> 
>  - the chain from author -> committer should be visible in the 
>    Signed-off-by: lines.
> 
>    If you rebase somebody elses tree, you screw that up. You need to add 
>    your sign-off, since now *you* are the new committer, and *you* took
>    somebody elses work!

I agree with this and that is exactly what I screwed up by mistake
this time around.

Normally when I rebase I walk through the patches that came from other
people's trees and add signoffs as needed.  I understand that this
is frowned upon to some extent as well.

> Put another way: think of the absolute *chaos* that would happen if I were 
> to rebase instead of just merging. Every time I pull from you I'd 
> invalidate your whole tree, and you'd have to re-generate. It gets 
> unmaintainable very quickly.

I actually wouldn't mind that, the first thing I do when sending a
pull request is I stop putting things into my tree and as soon as the
recipient pulls I wipe out my tree and clone a fresh copy of their's.

It's really not a big deal.  The pusher can queue patches and other
stuff up in their mailbox or in a directory somewhere.  This quiet
period also allows those patches to have some time to be reviewed on
the lists before they actually end up in anyone's tree.

I really like that mode of operation.

--
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/