linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] x86 fixes for 2.6.26

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: <20080517015705.GA20375@mit.edu>
Date:	Fri, 16 May 2008 21:57:06 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] x86 fixes for 2.6.26

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 03:47:53PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Do nice topic branches, where each branch has a reason for existing. The 
> "x86-fixes-for-linus" branch has x86 fixes. 
> 
> This happens almost every time somebody starts using git properly: at that 
> point the rebasing no longer hides bad habits.

Why do you consider rebasing topic branches a bad thing?  It does help
keep the history much cleaner, and it means that I can test to make
sure the topic branch works well with the latest head of the
development branch.

Is there a write up of what you consider the "proper" git workflow?

   	   	       	    		     	      - 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/