From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] at91: fist cleanup branch for 3.5
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:11:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201204231111.47448.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMg4fJD9ojem_Z2ZZTswK10TwNMtBMncPYhQS9ozmPfqbg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday 22 April 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
> There, I had this workflow:
>
> * git fetch <url+branch from pull request>
> * tig FETCH_HEAD (look at contents, sanity check, etc: If something
> looks wrong there's no merge to undo)
> * git checkout -b subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD to create the pulled-in
> topic branch
> * git checkout next/topic
> * git pull --log <url+branch from pull request> to get the original
> URL in the merge commit
>
> Then the usual steps to get it into for-next and added to the contents file.
Ok. I've now started skipping the 'checkout -b' step and just doing
a 'git branch subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD', but the result is the same.
> That way we do get the --log in the next/ branch as well as the tag
> message, but only one merge changeset. It also has the benefit of
> making it trivial to see when things have been merged with mainline
> which branches can be pruned and not.
>
> The only thing missing from that workflow is the authenticity of the
> subarch/topic branch once it's done, in case there is tinkering with
> the arm-soc repo by some third party. I don't think that's a big risk
> since we tend to diff the for-next contents before and after a
> rebuild, so any delta in file contents will be caught. Since each
> branch is documented in arm-soc-for-next-contents, we should have all
> bases covered there.
I also catch changes to the branches when I update my tree.
> I guess we could tag every subarch/topic tip as well, but it'll get
> pretty noisy with all them in the main repo. We have the option of
> pushing those to a separate repo instead of the main arm-soc.git if we
> wanted though.
The idea I've had before is to just keep tags for each subarch/topic
instead of branches, which would seperate them from one another, and
we could leave the message in the tag without it cluttering the history.
The main disadvantage I see in that is that I don't have a good workflow
for maintaining remote tags yet.
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD" <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] at91: fist cleanup branch for 3.5
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:11:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201204231111.47448.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMg4fJD9ojem_Z2ZZTswK10TwNMtBMncPYhQS9ozmPfqbg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday 22 April 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
> There, I had this workflow:
>
> * git fetch <url+branch from pull request>
> * tig FETCH_HEAD (look at contents, sanity check, etc: If something
> looks wrong there's no merge to undo)
> * git checkout -b subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD to create the pulled-in
> topic branch
> * git checkout next/topic
> * git pull --log <url+branch from pull request> to get the original
> URL in the merge commit
>
> Then the usual steps to get it into for-next and added to the contents file.
Ok. I've now started skipping the 'checkout -b' step and just doing
a 'git branch subarch/topic FETCH_HEAD', but the result is the same.
> That way we do get the --log in the next/ branch as well as the tag
> message, but only one merge changeset. It also has the benefit of
> making it trivial to see when things have been merged with mainline
> which branches can be pruned and not.
>
> The only thing missing from that workflow is the authenticity of the
> subarch/topic branch once it's done, in case there is tinkering with
> the arm-soc repo by some third party. I don't think that's a big risk
> since we tend to diff the for-next contents before and after a
> rebuild, so any delta in file contents will be caught. Since each
> branch is documented in arm-soc-for-next-contents, we should have all
> bases covered there.
I also catch changes to the branches when I update my tree.
> I guess we could tag every subarch/topic tip as well, but it'll get
> pretty noisy with all them in the main repo. We have the option of
> pushing those to a separate repo instead of the main arm-soc.git if we
> wanted though.
The idea I've had before is to just keep tags for each subarch/topic
instead of branches, which would seperate them from one another, and
we could leave the message in the tag without it cluttering the history.
The main disadvantage I see in that is that I don't have a good workflow
for maintaining remote tags yet.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-23 11:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-17 15:45 [GIT PULL] at91: fist cleanup branch for 3.5 Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-17 15:45 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-17 16:02 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-17 16:02 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-04-22 20:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-04-22 20:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-04-22 22:03 ` Olof Johansson
2012-04-22 22:03 ` Olof Johansson
2012-04-23 11:11 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2012-04-23 11:11 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201204231111.47448.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.