Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 0/4] ppc patches for qemu-2.7 stable branch

[David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1659 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:57:19PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 13 October 2016 at 12:54, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On 13 October 2016 at 06:15, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> >> The following changes since commit 1dc33ed90bf1fe1c2014dffa0d9e863c520d953a:
> >>
> >>   Update version for v2.7.0 release (2016-09-02 13:44:11 +0100)
> >>
> >> are available in the git repository at:
> >>
> >>   git://github.com/dgibson/qemu.git tags/ppc-for-2.7-20161013
> >>
> >> for you to fetch changes up to 2e68f28854f0120c9a938a61b64aaf1eaecb162b:
> >>
> >>   ppc: Check the availability of transactional memory (2016-10-13 12:58:06 +1100)
> >
> > Applied to master, thanks. (I hope that was what you had in mind;
> > if not we'll have to unwind stuff somehow...)
> 
> unwind> looking more closely, there's no actual diff between HEAD
> now and what it was, so the merge commit is a no-op of sorts.
> Hopefully it doesn't cause any problems.

Right.. these were all (clean) cherry picks from the master branch
anyway, so I'd expect it to be a no-op.

> More generally, we need to come up with something for distinguishing
> PULL requests not for master, because my current workflow basically
> says "anything that says 'for you to fetch changes up to' will get
> merged into master...

Um.. yes.. this was intended for merge to the 2.7 branch, not master.
Any ideas how I should express that?

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]