Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: pasky@ucw.cz, davem@davemloft.net, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: : Networking
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:51:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050426125141.6ec38d31.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504261209470.18901@ppc970.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> > I don't know if it'll be successful continually merging all those trees
> > together.  The way I did this with bk was to have a separate repo for each
> > tree, but I don't think I'll want 30-40 separate git trees.
> 
> You really don't. With git, the only thing you need is one object store,
> and some way to _track_ those 30-40 separate git trees (and "track" really
> means "remember a single SHA1 name for their top-of-tree").

Petr's wrappers do all that head tracking OK (which is why I'm using a
combo of those and of lower-level gittiness).  They do handy remote repo
tracking too.

> Then you can merge any combination of the 40 in the same tree. 
> 
> You'll get confused easily, but if you do this all with tools, it 
> shouldn't be too bad.
> 
> > So hm.  I guess git did what it was supposed to do here, and that a `git
> > merge' would have removed the common patch.  But if I take the approach of
> > merging all those subsystem trees I do wonder if things will come
> > unstuck...
> 
> Well, git isn't as good at merging as BK is, and your usage sure as hell
> would be a horrible worst-case example, but it might actually work fine.  
> Git merges are _cheap_ (with a capital C, and probably H as well) when
> they work out, and quite frankly, so far they have always worked out for
> me.
> 
> But yeah, you'd be doing some pretty aggressive merging, using a tool that 
> is two weeks old. It might work. I'd be interested to know ;)

Hm.  For now I might try what I have plus Jan's fancy interdiff command to
remove duped patches.  We'll see.  I obtained a copy of Tony's ia64 diff
quite happily - it didn't have any duplicates.

(It's fairly common for two subsystem maintainers to apply the same patch. 
With bk I was resolving that by just smashing the patches on top of each
other, ignoring the rejects and refreshing the topmost patch.  That
approach actually resolved this linus-vs-davem dupe as well.  But the duped
patch was so damn BIG that it threw me.  And I wasn't feeling gitty enough
to go hunting about looking for the particular patch(es) which caused the
problem)

  reply	other threads:[~2005-04-26 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20050425214326.512b006e.davem@davemloft.net>
2005-04-26  7:57 ` : Networking Andrew Morton
2005-04-26 14:59   ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 15:40     ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-04-26 18:15       ` Petr Baudis
2005-04-26 17:19   ` Jan Harkes
2005-04-26 18:33   ` Petr Baudis
2005-04-26 18:56     ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-26 19:13       ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 19:51         ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2005-04-26 20:11           ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 20:35             ` Bram Cohen
2005-04-28  3:55               ` Ryan Anderson
2005-04-28  4:43                 ` Daniel Barkalow

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=20050426125141.6ec38d31.akpm@osdl.org \
    --to=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pasky@ucw.cz \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox