Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> I've rewritten the "Tips for maintaining custodian trees" section to
>>> reflect Wolfgang's request that the "master" branch be used for patches
>>> for him to pull.
>>>
>>> Conceptually, this is very different from my previous recommendation /
>>> methodology writeup. In practice, however, it is a trivial change. The
>>> fundamental difference is to create a separate branch ("uboot") to track
>>> the master repo and rebase the "master" branch against that, instead of
>>> vice versa.
>> Rebasing the master branch, i. e. the one I'll be pullung from?
>>
>> Are you sure that is a good idea? Note that I (and probably others)
>> will be pulling from that branch, and not only once!
>>
>> Quote from the git-rebase man page:
>>
>> ...
>> NOTES
>> When you rebase a branch, you are changing its history in a
>> way that will cause problems for anyone who already has a copy
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> of the branch in their repository and tries to pull updates
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> from you. You should understand the implications of using git
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>> rebase on a repository that you share.
>> ...
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Wolfgang Denk
>
> Well, that is what I understood you to be asking for, and it worked this
> past merge window. That could have been luck, but I suspect not.
>
> The conflicting requirements are:
> 1) Wolfgang wishes to pull from the subrepo "master" branch
> 2) Subrepository custodians must rebase to pull the latest changes and
> fix any merge conflicts so that Wolfgang's pulls don't have merge conflicts.
>
> I don't believe the rebasing will cause problems because the rebasing is
> pulling from the u-boot.git master repository (or possibly
> u-boot-testing.git) which is rebuilding the subrepo "uboot" branch to
> match the u-boot.git master, and then rebasing the subrepo "master"
> based on the u-boot.git master. This will make the subrepo "master"
> *match* the u-boot.git master *plus* append the new patches to be pulled.
>
> I think the difference with our use vs. the general case that the
> warning applies to is that the custodians are making their "master"
> branch conform exactly to the u-boot.git master branch and then adding
> on the patches to be pulled.
Adding to this thought, rebasing a custodian repo rewrites its history
*to match the master u-boot.git repo* (and then add to it). Based on my
limited knowledge and experience, I think that is a *good* thing.
If we don't "rewrite" our custodian histories to match the master
u-boot.git repo history, very quickly it will be impossible to compare
the custodian repo to the master because the patches will be in
different order.
We are your slaves,
gvb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
U-Boot-Users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
