From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vineet Gupta Subject: Multiple for-next branches from same tree Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:33:54 +0530 Message-ID: <51382DCA.5010209@synopsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hermes.synopsys.com ([198.182.44.81]:49235 "EHLO hermes.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750769Ab3CGGEH (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Mar 2013 01:04:07 -0500 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next Hi Stephen, With ARC arch merged in 3.9-rc1 I feel the need for a revised workflow. I intend to have 2 branches for -next exposure: for-curr and for-next. * for-curr would contain the bug fixes for this release to be sent to Linus at some point in time. * for-next obviously is next release stuff and will be rebased off for-curr. The other strategy, personally less preferred, is to keep only for-next and tag it at right cut off point when sending pull request to Linus. Do you see any semantical differences in the two approaches. One (hypothetical) scenario that comes to my mind is that if for-curr introduces a conflict, which for-next fixes up somehow, that would still be caught in both the cases. Comments ! Thx, -Vineet