[U-Boot-Users] [Microblaze] Pull Request: git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-microblaze.git merge branch

Wolfgang Denk
2007-10-14T09:16:35Z

In message <fa686aa40710131739u31ab087axe554ab04fbb6b2c5@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> Really? It's perfectly reasonable for custodians to have multiple
> branches and to request for you to pull from a specific one. This

It is definitely perfectly reasonable to have multiple branches
(otherwise we might go back to CVS - shudder).

But if you want to make life easy for me, then always use the same one
(ideally simply master) to request the poull from.

THis allows me to set up all the custodian repos as remote tracking
branches in one remotes.<group>. This allows me to get a quick
overview. If you use several branches for oulling, it's pretty likely
that I miss the correct branch name in your pull request and do the
wrong thing.

> becomes especially true with the adoption of the merge window process.
> For instance, I have two branches on the 5xxx tree; one for bugfixes
> to be merged immediately and another for stuff queued up for the next
> window.

You could merge the bugfixes branch into master immediately and the
other one when the next window opens?

> Besides, when someone uses git-request-pull (like Michal did) it's a
> pretty trivial cut/paste to use git-pull to bring it into your branch.

I don't pull immediately. I first fetch it into a local tracking
branch so I can review it more easily before merging it.

> It's not like it causes you extra work. :-)

That's exactly the problem: it *does* cause more work.

Maybe my usage of git is sub-optimal, I'm just learning. But it seems
to work pretty efficiet to me... If you have better ideas I'd
appreciate all tips and tricks...

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
CAUTION: The Mass of This Product Contains the Energy Equivalent of
85 Million Tons of TNT per Net Ounce of Weight.