From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regulator updates for 3.3
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:45:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120110184530.GE7164@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyhoh0rT_ujuE1w3RpuR7kqivYFwPpm66VC-xtq1PiGUQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:27:01AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Just don't do it. There's no excuse. The *only* time you should merge
> is when a sub lieutenant asks you to - and if you have people who work
> with you and ask you to do pointless merges almost every day, just
> tell them to shut the f*ck up already!
Hrm, OK. These merges are all merges up of bug fixes for -rc from my
own tree into the development code which I tend to do constantly to make
it easier to work directly on the development branch. What's the best
practice here - push things to you a bit more aggressively and wait
until you've tagged a -rc and then merge that back up into the
development branch?
> Do your development in a real branch, and do sane things in that real
> branch - like pulling from the people who work with you, but only when
> they ask, and only when they are ready. And applying patches. But
> never *ever* have those stupid pointless "Merge remote-tracking branch
> 'regulator/for-linus' into regulator-next" in the branch you actually
> use for development, and the branch you send to me.
The -next branch is the branch used for development here unless there's
anything that's actually a topic that might want to get viewed
separately (like the device tree stuff this time), and all the merges
are from my own trees. The reason they showed up as merges from remotes
is an oddity of my workflow here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-10 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-09 7:37 Regulator updates for 3.3 Mark Brown
2012-01-10 18:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 18:45 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2012-01-10 19:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 22:27 ` Mark Brown
2012-01-10 22:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 23:17 ` Mark Brown
2012-01-11 2:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-11 2:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-11 3:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-11 3:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-11 6:59 ` Re* " Junio C Hamano
2012-01-11 16:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-16 0:14 ` Pete Harlan
2012-01-16 23:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-16 23:43 ` Martin Fick
2012-01-17 5:33 ` Pete Harlan
2012-01-17 6:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-11 3:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-11 18:40 ` Paul Gortmaker
2012-01-13 19:12 ` [PATCH] merge: Make merge strategy message follow the diffstat Junio C Hamano
2012-01-13 19:27 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-01-13 19:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-17 8:03 ` Miles Bader
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120110184530.GE7164@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).