From: Jason Cooper <u-boot@lakedaemon.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 07:53:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121011115324.GL12330@titan.lakedaemon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121011071922.0EE66203409@gemini.denx.de>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 09:19:22AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Stephen Warren,
>
> In message <5075F48A.2080504@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote:
> >
> > I believe that's (part of) why Linux is tending towards pull requests of
> > a (signed) tag rather than a branch, since the tag always points at a
> > specific commit, and incremental pull requests can just create a new tag
> > name. Of course, the ability to sign tags also also a motivator.
>
> I tend to disagree here. Tags can easily be removed. As such, they
> are in no way different from or better than a specific commit in a
> branch that does not get rebased.
I agree with Wolfgang, I move signed tags around all the time _before_ I
push to a public branch. That tends to happen because I'm still
learning the process, *not* as a part of a proper workflow.
For me, signed tags serve two purposes. The first is sub-maintainer
verification. Arnd Bergmann and Olof Johansson both signed my gpg key
at the last Kernel Summit. So, when they pull a branch, they know I
created it. Second, using git v1.7.9 and newer, request-pull will
insert the tag message into the body of the pull-request. This provides
a nice summary of the branch in the email, as opposed to the branch-name
chaos we see now. This summary, stays with the branch regardless of the
number of times the maintainer merges it.
I suppose there is a third advantage. The signed tag is attached to a
specific sha1 commit. If a maintainer inadvertently changes the commit
history of a branch by doing a rebase or similar, the tag would
disappear from the tip of the branch. Kind of like the canary in the
mine.
Which brings me to another point I haven't seen mentioned in this thread
yet, git-rerere (1). Arnd and Olof make extensive use of this command
to remember how they have resolved merge conflicts. afaict, since I
don't need it at my level, they are continuously merging branches over
and over again. Against new branches, new versions of widespread
changes (iomem, platform_data in the last window). rerere makes that
workload possible.
hth,
Jason.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-11 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-07 18:49 [U-Boot] [PULL] u-boot-usb/next Marek Vasut
2012-10-09 14:23 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-09 21:03 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model (was: Re: [PULL] u-boot-usb/next) Stephen Warren
2012-10-09 21:32 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-09 22:14 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model Stephen Warren
2012-10-09 22:43 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-09 23:02 ` Graeme Russ
2012-10-09 22:59 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-09 23:07 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-09 23:17 ` Graeme Russ
2012-10-09 23:00 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-09 23:25 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 0:20 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 15:55 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 22:02 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 22:19 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-11 7:19 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-11 11:53 ` Jason Cooper [this message]
2012-10-11 17:00 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-13 19:08 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-11 16:27 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-11 7:28 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-11 16:54 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-13 18:58 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-09 22:19 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model (was: Re: [PULL] u-boot-usb/next) Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-09 23:04 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 6:15 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-10 16:04 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 18:40 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-11 16:54 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-11 17:16 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-11 17:26 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-11 18:30 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-13 19:30 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-13 21:13 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-13 22:25 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-15 17:56 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-15 19:00 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-13 19:17 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-15 16:32 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-15 18:55 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-15 21:42 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-11 18:13 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-11 18:45 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-11 18:59 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-12 10:11 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-10-12 21:49 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-13 19:20 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-13 19:06 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-11 7:17 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-10-11 16:38 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model (was: Re: [PULL] u-boot-usb/next) Tom Rini
2012-10-11 17:16 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-11 17:22 ` [U-Boot] U-Boot git usage model Stephen Warren
2012-10-11 17:27 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-11 18:30 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-12 5:29 ` Stefan Roese
2012-10-12 15:49 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-13 19:34 ` Wolfgang Denk
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=20121011115324.GL12330@titan.lakedaemon.net \
--to=u-boot@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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