[alsa-devel] HG -> GIT migration
rene.herman at keyaccess.nl
Wed May 21 16:40:37 CEST 2008
On 21-05-08 15:48, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> On Wed, 21 May 2008, Rene Herman wrote:
>> It's "worse" than that; rebasing is designed for a _private_ development
>> model. git-rebase is a very handy tool for people like myself (people
>> without a downstream that is) and it basically enables the quilt model
>> of a stack of patches on top of git but public trees that have people
>> pulling from them should generally not rebase or everyone who _is_
>> pulling finds a different tree each time.
> I don't see big obstacles with this model. You can do changes in your
> local tree and when 'git pull' fails from the subsystem tree, pull new
> subsystem tree to a new branch and do rebasing in your local tree, too.
> Rebasing can keep the subsystem tree more clean I think. It's only
> about to settle an appropriate workflow.
I'm also still frequently trying to figure out an/the efficient way of
using GIT but it does seem it's not just a matter of "pure downstream"
(which I do believe ALSA has few enough of to not make this be a huge
problem). For example linux-next is also going to want to pull in ALSA
and say it does, finds a trivial conflict with the trivial tree that it
also pulls in and fixes things up. If you rebase that which linux-next
pulls from I believe it will have to redo the fix next time it pulls
from you since it's getting all those new changesets.
I guess this can be avoided by just not rebasing that which linux-next
is pulling... and I in fact don't even know if linux-next does any
conflict resolution itself, trivial or otherwise.
I'll see how things work out.
More information about the Alsa-devel