From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: process question - linux-next conflicts Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:36:34 +1000 Message-ID: <20160705233634.55d802c3@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20160705130124.GA18622@osadl.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:37981 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932860AbcGENgg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2016 09:36:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160705130124.GA18622@osadl.at> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nicholas Mc Guire Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org Hi Nicholas, On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 13:01:24 +0000 Nicholas Mc Guire = wrote: > > linux-next daily tree mails include information on conflicts like=20 >=20 > "The drm-misc tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree." >=20 > and if one looks at these email-reported conflicts they are quite > inffrequent, e.g. March 2016 range from 0-5 with a mean of about 1.5= , > but the plots on http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html for=20 > conflicts show significantly higher numbers, again March 2016 > range between aprox. 10 and 75 with a mean of aprox. 40 - so I=C2=B4= m=20 > mixing up something here - are the plots refereing to different=20 > conflicts or am I just interpreting the e-mail notes incorectly ? The graphs show the total number of conflicts you would get if you did the merges of all the trees from scratch on any one day. But I only report new conflicts each day. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell