Re: [Adeos-main] Re: [RFC] git workflow

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2261 bytes --]

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> [Keeping up-to-date]
>>> 1. The original kernel tree may have been updated, and the ipipe patch
>>>    needs to be rebased
>>>
>>>    # git fetch
>>>    # git rebase origin
>>
>> I meanwhile learned that rebasing doesn't work well with public git
>> tree. Once you pushed some tree, say, linux-2.6.19 + ipipe-patch1..n
>> out, you cannot rebase to 2.6.20 + ipipe-patch1..n without breaking the
>> linear history.
>>
>> Either we only push out final trees (but that would lock-out early
>> testers that may want to pull from devel-head), or we need to evolve
>> with ipipe patches deeply merged. That means when we have 2.6.19 + ipipe
>> cleanly on top of it, pulling 2.6.20 origin may cause conflicts (like
>> the paravirt stuff does on i386 ATM). We would then have to merge the
>> upstream patches into the I-pipe tree, effectively adopting them to
>> I-pipe. An extraction of a potential I-pipe patch stack would be more
>> complicated that way, but not infeasible.
>>
>> Comments?
> 
> I am a complete git newbie myself. But the simpler way I would imagine

Then I'm at least not alone. :)

> to develop the I-pipe would be to create one branch for each version of
> the kernel. We would then use a script to generate all architectures
> specific patches.
> 
> Porting from one version to the next means merging the difference
> between the ipipe branch for linux 2.x.y and the linux 2.x.y sources
> with the linux-2.x.y+1 sources.

Of course, we could branch per major release and rebase on top of new
kernel versions. But that would mean we have to wait until the official
release to publish our trees. Otherwise, the risk would be the later
fixes require a rebase.

The point is likely how to extract ipipe stuff from a fully merged git
tree. I think this should not be that tricky - as long as every patch in
some series only touches existing files exclusively (i.e. no two patches
modify the same source file). Then we could simply apply some diff mask
(git diff origin..master file1 file2 file3...) to generate those
individual patches for reference to anyone willing to port stuff to a
new arch or board.

Jan


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 250 bytes --]