From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752574AbZJWVDN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:03:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752474AbZJWVDM (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:03:12 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.124]:47909 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752129AbZJWVDM (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:03:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [kernel.org users] Please remember to run 'git gc' on your repositories From: Steven Rostedt Reply-To: rostedt@goodmis.org To: Stefan Richter , LKML Cc: Nicolas Pitre , Ingo Molnar , Stephen Rothwell , "Luck, Tony" , Jeff Garzik , Robert Richter , Dmitry Torokhov , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Jean Delvare , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <4AE21839.3000000@s5r6.in-berlin.de> References: <4ADD0793.3000707@kernel.org> <20091020020449.GF24370@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20091020034829.GA12833@elte.hu> <20091020140750.GH11972@erda.amd.com> <20091022122042.e535d43c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20091023112732.GB5886@elte.hu> <4AE19A74.1090709@garzik.org> <20091023123555.GA25366@elte.hu> <57C9024A16AD2D4C97DC78E552063EA3E33D0174@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> <20091023134115.GD27097@elte.hu> <4AE21839.3000000@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Kihon Technologies Inc. Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:03:14 -0400 Message-Id: <1256331794.26028.36.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [ took off users.kernel.org and added LKML ] There's a thread started on LKML, search for the subject: "[RFC] to rebase or not to rebase on linux-next" (thanks Ingo for the typo fix). And continue this conversation there. Thanks! -- Steve On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 22:55 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > >> linux-next should not be used as a 'test and rebase' feedback loop for > >> build-broken, unbisectable crap. Why do you think it should be used for > >> that? > > > > I've been under the impression that linux-next has been created exactly > > for that: a tree that pulls everything together for testing and early > > merge conflict resolutions, and to be thrown away the next day when the > > process is repeated again. It is indeed exactly that: a "test and > > rebase" feedback tree where the big picture can be assessed before stuff > > is headed for Linus's tree where commits are then stable. > > > > To my knowledge, unlike Linus's tree, linux-next was never meant to be a > > stable tree itself, nor its components. > [...] > > The trees which are pulled into linux-next are supposed to be > unit-tested. It is material which you would ask Linus to pull if he had > a merge window open today. The only thing that this material may still > lack is integration testing (and exposure to mainline's huge userbase of > course). > > I have doubts that the majority of build errors which linux-next > frequently encounters are purely integration related.