Andy Green wrote: > Are we talking about the same thing here? Show me where the "2.6.0" or > whatever kernel tree is in svn? It ain't there if I understood it.
Ah, you mean across upstream changes. You're right, the upstream is implicit and, we don't have the kernel.org revision history in SVN anyway. > Once we're set up with git, we should be able to revert to a whole tree > of the kernel at any patchlevel, whatever the base kernel version was at > that time we will revert to that too. Hmm, but you'd still have to follow whatever branches are there. So if we rebase only every once in a while, this wouldn't be too different from what we have now. > But the kind of branch we are looking at for this job won't ever do > that... if you want to revert something you have to commit the > "antipatch" for whatever it was you didn't like any more, Okay, and stgit will find the antipatches or slight-change-patches as well, and apply them to the chunk we're preparing for mainline ? Example: would the _fiq_ipc change, after you've committed the _fiq_ipc version to our public GIT repository, still result in a single introduce-fiq-etc.patch for upstream, or would have to feed mainstream two patches and/or combine them manually or through some mechanism external to stgit ? - Werner
