Re: Keeping up to date with the upstream

[Joe Eloff <kagen101@gmail.com>]

On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 23:37 +0200, Peter Hüwe wrote:
> Am Montag 05 Juli 2010 23:11:22 schrieben Sie:
> > So if I understand you correctly should finish my patching first on my
> > current branch then checkout master and git reset --hard origin and do
> > clean up then go on with something else as obviously those patches will
> > not be in and the work I have done is now the patch.
> > 
> > And then from now on just make patches on the master and not worry about
> > branches since I will keep up to date with the upstream anyway, must
> > just make sure I have created my patches before syncing the upstream as
> > to not loose the work I have done.
> 
> 
> That's at least how I handle the linux-next tree for my buildfailure fixes.
> I'm not sure if it is the 'correct' way, however it works quite well for me.
> 
> The advantages are that your patch is always up to date with upstream - since 
> you're usually less than one day behind.
> 
> The drawback is that you lose your changes with each --reset -- however when 
> you create a patch with git format-patch you have a copy of your changes 
> always at hand - and you can perhaps reapply them.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
Agree, it will work well and yes you have all your patches on hand so
can't see any problem with this you can always just re-apply if need be.

'Correct' I guess is what works well for you and I can't see why this
approach won't work well, seems pretty logical and is the way I am going
to use.

Thanks for this info was exactly what I wanted!

Joe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html