linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] first block round for 2.6.31

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]

Date:	Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:52:00 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] first block round for 2.6.31

On Thu, Jun 11 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > 
> > > Btw, Jens: in your tree, you've committed Tejun's changes without adding 
> > > your own sign-off. Not good!
> > 
> > That's for the patches that I pulled from his git tree. It should list
> > him as committer too.
> 
> NO!
> 
> It sounds like you have done a _major_ no-no, which is to pull from his 
> tree, and then rebase it. 
> 
> DO NOT DO THAT! NOT EVER!
> 
> If you pull from somebody elses tree, you can no longer touch the commit. 
> It absolutely has to stay the same. Otherwise we see this kind of insane 
> duplication. 
> 
> You're doing something seriously wrong here. I wrote a long rant about 
> what the rules were last release cycle, but now I can't find it. 
> Basically, if you're not the committer, you really must never EVER touch 
> it. 
> 
> [ Anybody with enough google-fu to find my rant, so I don't have to 
>   re-rant? ]

I pulled from his tree, don't think I ever rebased it. To be honest, I
rebase a lot, and I used to do that for the 'export' branches as well.
But for this cycle I have kept it clean and pulled in your tree when I
knew a conflict at arisen. More trees are now based off the block tree,
so I wanted to make sure that they were able to pull cleanly when they
wanted to. I usually also always apply the patches manually instead of
pulling it in, since I go over the patches anyway.

So I fully agree with what you are saying, if anything was rebased this
time then it was a mistake (that I don't recollect)...

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/