[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160728201846.GW2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 21:18:46 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] configfs updates for 4.8
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 01:05:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/configfs.git tags/configfs-for-4.8
> >
> > for you to fetch changes up to 3dc3afadeb0403fd967b97ee282ab9053d36da2b:
>
> Same lack of diffstat..
>
> There's a reason we have a "git request-pull" helper. You don't have
> to use it (lots of people end up using other things that match their
> workflow better), but you do have to generate something at least as
> good at that.
FWIW, git request-pull is very likely to make complete mess of
diffstat - all it takes is branch started at -rc1, then a merge from
anything started at later point (e.g. Miklos asking to pull ->d_real()
work from his tree into vfs.git, with his branch starting at -rc5).
I've ended up doing git fetch origin; git checkout -b XXX origin; git
merge work.misc; git diff XXX --stat and replacing the mess produced by
git-request-pull with that. It works, of course, but what worries me
is that less obvious mess could've slipped unnoticed. Might make sense
to teach git request-pull to warn about likely bogus diffstat...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists