From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: wireless: the contenders Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:52:21 -0500 Message-ID: <20060118205221.GA11270@havoc.gtf.org> References: <20060118200616.GC6583@tuxdriver.com> <43CEA6EB.6080209@pobox.com> <20060118204844.GE6583@tuxdriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jbenc@suse.cz, softmac-dev@sipsolutions.net, bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060118204844.GE6583@tuxdriver.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 03:48:49PM -0500, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 03:36:59PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > John W. Linville wrote: > > > >The "master" branch of that tree is (mostly) up-to-date w/ Linus, plus > > >changes I recently sent to Jeff. Those changes are also available on > > >the "upstream-jgarzik" branch, but it is frozen to when I requested > > >Jeff's pull. > > > Typically I do not update 'master' unless I am also updating 'upstream' > > with vanilla Linus changes, in order to avoid screwing up the tree heads > > and the diff. When I do update 'master' from 'upstream', it is a > > trivial matter to then pull those changes into 'upstream': > > Good info...thanks! > > FWIW, I have an "origin" branch that corresponds to Linus' tree. > I think that probably enables the same kind of usage as you noted...? Yep, it doesn't matter what you call it. I avoid 'origin' since a 'git pull' without arguments will automatically update that (and possibly master too). But it's just a name. Any branch with vanilla Linus tree in it will achieve the behavior I described. Jeff