Re: [ANN] Introducing new "test" branch in powerpc.git tree

[Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>]

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> [...]
> Now, one important rule is: test will be reset at the beginning of every
> merge window. I will not let it degenerate into the old linuxppc-dev bk
> tree that drifted for years and had things that never got merged.
>
> I'm also not sure whether sub-maintainers should do the same thing with
> a "test" branch of their own. I certainly don't mind if they rebase
> their "next" branches so I'm happy for them to play the same game
> directly into their 'next' branch as long as the day they ask me to pull
> it into the real 'next', they are reasonably confident that the stuff in
> there is stable.

I'm cool with this.  I certainly maintain a branch which is frequently
rebased and that is exactly where I stash stuff as I try to decide
what to do with it.  The only difference is that mine isn't usually
public.  If people want to see it, then I push it out, but otherwise I
just wait until I've got a real pull request.

In fact, in this cycle I did push out to my -next and then had to redo
it before I sent my pull request because one of the middle commits had
an oops (but, nobody bases their patches on my -next tree, so it
doesn't have the same repercussions).

g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.