Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Any feedback for -next?

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 04:42:21 -0700
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 05:54:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Any other ideas?  
> 
> I'm new to this area, so please forgive what might be a silly
> question: would it make sense for maintainers' -next trees to keep
> a stable git history?
> 
> Some maintainer trees are already stable and append-only, which
> gives linux-next users/testers stable commits to point to, instead
> of ephemeral commits that can disappear later due to history
> rewrites.
> 
> Would getting rid of these ephemeral commits make linux-next easier
> to work with?

This has come up at the Maintainers Summit in the past. I believe it is
even in the article I posted earlier in another thread.

   https://lwn.net/Articles/1050027/

We are even discussing issues about this in that other thread as well:

  https://lore.kernel.org/all/0a8c1e90-1de1-4a76-b0fa-e367a4bd4f55@sirena.org.uk/

I try to keep my linux-next branch clean, but I do rebase to add tags. I do
on occasion remove commits if they prove to be totally broken. That's rare
but I rather have that then having to push something to Linus where a bunch
of commits are simply reverted.

-- Steve