From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760294AbYEFEnq (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 00:43:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752056AbYEFEnh (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 00:43:37 -0400 Received: from chilli.pcug.org.au ([203.10.76.44]:51923 "EHLO smtps.tip.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751052AbYEFEnh (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 00:43:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 14:43:18 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Pekka Enberg" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, sfrench@us.ibm.com, swhiteho@redhat.com, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, jeff@garzik.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, drzeus-list@drzeus.cx, jack@ucw.cz, cbou@mail.ru, jens.axboe@oracle.com, ericvh@gmail.com, wim@iguana.be, chris@zankel.net, nico@cam.org, clameter@sgi.com, ezk@cs.sunysb.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next Message-Id: <20080506144318.5432cdcc.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20080505113128.d68863a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20080502151206.b40f77ea.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <84144f020805051116mdbbea01q39f17bce95c95dbb@mail.gmail.com> <20080505113128.d68863a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0beta3 (GTK+ 2.12.9; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="PGP-SHA1"; boundary="Signature=_Tue__6_May_2008_14_43_18_+1000_yS6qlieqTAw2LtLV" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Signature=_Tue__6_May_2008_14_43_18_+1000_yS6qlieqTAw2LtLV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 5 May 2008 11:31:28 -0700 Andrew Morton = wrote: > > So I'd suggest that you have a #for-next which contains material for 2.6.= 26 > and 2.6.27 and a #for-mm which contains material for 2.6.28+. >=20 > Only problem is, I'd need to generate the #for-next -> #for-mm diff, and > that particular git operation has been troublesome in the past. Yeah, it is fine if one is a subset of the other but otherwise fraught with danger. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ --Signature=_Tue__6_May_2008_14_43_18_+1000_yS6qlieqTAw2LtLV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIH+H1TgG2atn1QN8RAtopAJ9s6CVvLcN56/yMlkPxM5ztOyAk3wCeOiBP GFjfJAKh4g1jIX36IDKqvpo= =dWus -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__6_May_2008_14_43_18_+1000_yS6qlieqTAw2LtLV--