Re: [RFC] to rebase or not to rebase on linux-next

[Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>]

Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Some of the reasons for the constant rebasing are:
> 
> 1) the patches are held in quilt, which just by nature leads to
> rebasing.  These developers find that quilt is the best tool for the
> job.

It shouldn't be difficult to implement a git-quiltimport porcelain which
  - remembers a previous import of a quilt tree,
  - compares that one ( = an existing branch) with a new quilt import
    ( = a new branch),
  - reuses all commits of the old import which have identical diffs/
    changelog/ authorship/ parent changeset as ones in the new import,
  - discards (or reverts?) commits of the old import that don't match
    the new import in this way,
  - finally rebases all remaining commits from the new import onto the
    kept old ones.

[OTOH the whole discussion is not about stable SHA1s in linux-next per
se, AFAIU, but about stability of (the history of) the code which is
released into linux-next, or about misuse of linux-next for more than
final integration-testing...?]
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= =-=- ==---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/