mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] regulator updates for v3.13-rc1
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:39:19 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131126003919.GT14725@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwPcr8TYpLUg5NP9x3RGCv4+U7vz-nNH6Br5ku3MDwaDw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1672 bytes --]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:10:01PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Btw, I suspect you could/should have just used an "octopus merge" to
> merge these kinds of small independent branches in one go. Just list
> all the branches you want to merge for one single "git merge", and
> you're done.

Yes, it's a more accurate reflection of what I'm doing since none of the
individual merges is a meaningful stage in development - either the
topics get used or the final for-linus and for-next merges get used but
not anything in between.  In fact my script originally started off doing
octopus merges but then Takashi complained at me saying you'd get
annoyed so I switched to the stack of merges.

> But it's up to you. I like seeing topic branches, and that part is
> absolutely a good git habit to get into. Octopus merges then have the
> upside that they then avoid having lots of pointless small merge
> commits to tie them all together, but they can make it slightly more
> challenging to figure out what went wrong if problems happen. So in
> this case, one option might have been to merge the three independent
> driver fixes with one single octopus merge, and then merge the core
> fix separately as a normal merge.

> Whatever. Not a big deal, I just thought I'd mention it if you perhaps
> didn't realize that git happily merges multiple branches at once..

If you're OK with octopus merges for things like this I'll definitely
take another look at using them, the enormous stack of merge commits
always looks noisy to me in the logs and pull requests and for things
like driver updates there's unlikely to be much doubt about which branch
it was if there's a problem.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-26  0:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-25 17:40 Mark Brown
2013-11-25 21:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-11-26  0:39   ` Mark Brown [this message]
2013-11-26  2:50     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-01-21 19:16     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-01-21 20:31       ` Mark Brown
2014-01-23  8:27       ` Takashi Iwai
2014-01-24  0:04       ` H. Peter Anvin

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=20131126003919.GT14725@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®