public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] DMA-mapping updates for v3.11
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 08:09:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51D5118B.4000903@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFww7SG3BVDs5jUTwX9pjARG3XQXA2g_9XQJf6agq=fD9g@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On 7/3/2013 11:02 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Marek Szyprowski
> <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> >
> > Right, I dropped one commit, which I found in other 'for_next' kernel tree
> > (the one from Russell King) before sending the pull request. What's wrong with
> > this approach?
>
> What did dropping the commit fix? Anything?
>
> DO NOT REBASE UNLESS YOU HAVE SERIOUSLY PRESSING REASONS!
>
> Why does this keep on coming up EVERY SINGLE RELEASE? Does nobody read my rants?
>
> A duplicate commit not a "seriously pressing reason". It may be reason
> for some introspection ("why did I and Russell end up applying the
> same patch and stepping on each others toes?") but it is not in itself
> at all a reason for rebasing.
>
> Reasons for rebasing include:
>
>   - "I am a complete moron, and I have terminally messed up my history
> with merges from random places to the point where it is completely
> unpullable"
>
>   - "There are commits that are so horribly broken in the history that
> I can't even revert them, because seeing them mentioned one more time
> will make me go blind"
>
> and the best one:
>
>   - "I never made my patches public in the first place, and I'll clean
> my ugly series up before posting them publicly for the first time".
>
> but that last one shouldn't happen just before sending it to me, it
> should happen a few weeks before sending to me so that linux-next has
> time to digest the beauty of the rebased series.
>
> The fact is, rebasing is a perfectly fine operation, but it's a fine
> operation that causes lots of problems if those commits have ever been
> public before. It means that linux-next cannot easily be compared to
> what I pull (which is why Stephen complains), but it also results in
> other developers not being able to trust your tree, and in the commits
> randomly changing and the testing base thus not being reliable any
> more (which is why I complain).

Ok, right. MY FAULT. I'm really sorry. I will never do it again.

Now, I want to repair what I broke. Do you want me to restore my tree to
the point before the rebase and send pull request again? The current tree
already appeared at next-20130703, so I wonder what would cause less harm
to others.

Best regards
-- 
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland



  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-04  6:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-02  8:35 [GIT PULL] DMA-mapping updates for v3.11 Marek Szyprowski
2013-07-03  0:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-07-03  7:58   ` Marek Szyprowski
2013-07-03 21:02     ` Linus Torvalds
2013-07-04  6:09       ` Marek Szyprowski [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-07-05 15:31 Marek Szyprowski

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=51D5118B.4000903@samsung.com \
    --to=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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