From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonas Smedegaard Subject: Re: [TopGit] Multiple concurrent sets of patches Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:07:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20090303220709.GY12820@jones.dk> References: <20090303113741.GO12820@jones.dk> <20090303130316.GA17702@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> <20090303192221.GV12820@jones.dk> <20090303194232.GB18423@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 03 23:09:16 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LecnO-00028P-AG for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 23:09:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758437AbZCCWH0 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:07:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759429AbZCCWHY (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:07:24 -0500 Received: from 0x573b188a.cpe.ge-1-2-0-1101.hknqu1.customer.tele.dk ([87.59.24.138]:53676 "EHLO xayide.jones.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759423AbZCCWHW convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:07:22 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xayide.jones.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0603011B961; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:07:19 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at jones.dk Received: from xayide.jones.dk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (xayide.jones.dk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id JGefb9-8Ydpz; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:07:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from auryn.jones.dk (auryn.jones.dk [192.168.222.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by xayide.jones.dk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6125911B7F9; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:07:16 +0100 (CET) Received: by auryn.jones.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B4391B977A; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:07:09 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090303194232.GB18423@pengutronix.de> X-FOAF: http://dr.jones.dk/foaf.rdf X-Face: "yShHCQ6@h{]=Se"1&kVc#Yd%lb=>9& Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAGFBMVEWbnI45Hxm/s6OD f2R0XU3Tzr2KjXXS5M59+7HJAAACY0lEQVQ4jW2TTW/jIBCGCa7ptdN4e0akbq9JTTmH MOu97nqLuLpxRK+rlSz//R3Ih9NqR4pI5uFlYDIv4yKKnuUQfWHYJQjESOuNdegOuL6A PSkiG4yFHFX7SRG1g1NU2zNJYDjur9JSzWWYOAGMab1IuFJFSiCulaR1OSvkTUobppSi b9DP5ADLxnDlfafsGZi0WDBNr2pPZAGwlwnQnXphq0iCBPxvgN0ZxLh5EDGdlCQElPIy ASbsnejpV5imsbOwSxuygr3T3emkicK/w4+0sqahIosMQkqMiysQD0dFIuPjBZhPIDzC xwk0GfBco4vlGzyfgYnDg0jvGwt0fGGVPwGSLC240nfacYn3nm7uM2hiRb1zbFfoQsnv VKpTRzAAWrS715Wof/rbSw2KylqEV/XEfTc9hyvw0DQHKP9I7qexvgbLoUEsp/z0epqB cY1G9z/Q0LC4eso9eb4GQ8+KljLppl8AX7W34zRO3l+DOBgu9VbNR42s0Rk4vsI1T13K ivHYEmq867UrymkMR3DpVXRGO8a9Cr4LtH8GtJ8mNFBKpoN8d76VRW2oH1Ot+JSGKHfX 0UdXaDgPo5IflKchZk4jJgLYUg0vRZ32E8AURCxg+nfFS53zJ0AIoVqrWpo6p2eAzkKr 6tXeqy+gJUkvtrWXOS8ZVIh0vmsGDbinEfq1zAKW3UpOq8jspfdTeCMbJIMkV2qSVW3Z 1dSO8BfueDIO4FYDzU6FpVcsjGHc3GVDG7VCBLLk5mWU2xC831T90eVGY3b/1j+16dn2 Prv2Se+UttbCElWxpaldwbdOrMU/uif692F3pH8AAAAASUVORK5CYII= User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 08:42:32PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig wrote: >On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 08:22:21PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 02:03:16PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: >> >also sprach Jonas Smedegaard [2009.03.03.1237 +0100]: >> >> It seems to me that TopGit is incapable of handling this. That it= =20 >> >> can only handle patchset against a single branch, and if the need= =20 >> >> arise for restructuring an additional patchset for e.g. a stable=20 >> >> or oldstable branch, then quilt needs to be used manually anyway. >> > >> >Let me try to understand you: you want TopGit to maintain a single=20 >> >feature branch against two different source branches? How should=20 >> >that work? Could you elaborate a bit so that your needs become a bi= t=20 >> >more obvious? >>=20 >> Not quite. I want TopGit to maintain multiple feature branches,=20 >> preferrably related. >>=20 >> With "related" I mean that I would like to be able to "fork" a chain= =20 >> of interdependent feature branches. >>=20 >> TopGit easily support one chain of branches: >>=20 >> upstream + pristine-tar -> master -> build >>=20 >> I want TopGit to additionally support the following: >>=20 >> upstream + pristine-tar -> stable-master -> stable-build >>=20 >> upstream + pristine-tar -> oldstable-master -> oldstable-build >>=20 >>=20 >> E.g. in addition to TopGit branches t/fix_01 and t/feature_01 I woul= d=20 >> want to fork those branches as t_stable/fix_01 and t_stable/feature_= 01. >>=20 >>=20 >> I know that I can create all those TopGit branches one by one, but I= =20 >> would then need to explicitly declare a list of TopGit branches to=20 >> apply each time I want to (re)generate a quilt patchlist. >For my kernel development I use topgit topic branches that collect=20 >topgit patch branches. Take this dependency graph: > > linus/master <- t/armmisc/patch1 <- t/armmisc-master <- t/armmisc-pu > ^ ^----t/armmisc/patch2 <--' | > `------t/armmisc/patch3 <----------------------' > >So t/armmisc-master collects patches that are ready for upstream, -pu >patches that need some more work. My head is spinning - the dependency graph in my head was upside down=20 compared to your ascii art here. I think I understand it . Thanks! I will try it out - I converted ghostscript last week to using TopGit a= s=20 an excercise: good challenge, a nice bunch of patches (but nothing near= =20 as complex as kernel stuff, I know). > tg create t/fixes-squeeze/CVE-2009-abcd master-squeeze t/fixes-etch/C= VE-2009-abcd > ... no need to apply patch > ... cherry-pick .topmsg from t/fixes-lenny/CVE-2009-abcd > git commit Above puzzles me: Is cherry-picking .topmsg just a lazy way to write=20 same description for parallel topicbranch, or is it a trick to cheat=20 TopGit into believing that that branch never needs updating? >But this doesn't help me for my kernel problem, because here I don't=20 >have that ordering on releases. I want to manage patches on top of=20 >linux-tip and the ARM tree, but none of these contains the other :-/ I can only begin to imagine the complexities of dealing with parallel=20 tracks of kernel patching... Good luck with that! Thanks a lot for your insight, - Jonas - --=20 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmtqg0ACgkQn7DbMsAkQLhMFACgkW1FYlWnEP8unk+wVgAkd0i+ UMwAoKT1mkxIRP6XmNKt+Rj3iJn2yUpM =3D7x2Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----