From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Linus <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: unneeded merge in the security tree
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 00:16:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130312041641.GE18595@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1303121510270.25612@tundra.namei.org>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:10:53PM +1100, James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2013, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > The top commit in the security tree today is a merge of v3.9-rc2. This
> > is a completely unnecessary merge as the tree before the merge was a
> > subset of v3.9-rc1 and so if the merge had been done using anything but
> > the tag, it would have just been a fast forward. I know that this is now
> > deliberate behaviour on git's behalf, but isn't there some way we can
> > make this easier on maintainers who are just really just trying to pick a
> > new starting point for their trees after a release? (at least I assume
> > that is what James was trying to do)
>
> Yes, and I was merging to a tag as required by Linus.
Why not just force the head of the security tree to be v3.9-rc2? Then
you don't end up creating a completely unnecessary merge commit, and
users who were at the previous head of the security tree will
experience a fast forward when they pull your new head.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-12 4:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-11 23:09 linux-next: unneeded merge in the security tree Stephen Rothwell
2013-03-12 4:10 ` James Morris
2013-03-12 4:16 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2013-03-12 5:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-03-12 13:25 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-12 20:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-12 9:29 ` Sedat Dilek
2013-03-12 17:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-12 17:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-03-12 19:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-12 20:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-12 21:20 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-12 21:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-12 21:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-12 21:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-12 22:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-13 2:30 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-13 3:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-12 21:30 ` Junio C Hamano
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=20130312041641.GE18595@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--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