Re: [GIT PULL] Global signal cleanup

[Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1747 bytes --]

Am 07.08.2014 02:28, schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi Richard,
> 
> On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 13:29:10 +0200 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06.08.2014 13:27, schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 13:18:54 +0200 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> the following changes since commit 19583ca584d6f574384e17fe7613dfaeadcdc4a6:
>>>>
>>>>   Linux 3.16 (2014-08-03 15:25:02 -0700)
>>>>
>>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>>
>>>>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rw/misc.git signal-cleanup
>>>
>>> This has all been rebased onto v3.16 but none of the patches changed.
>>
>> This was my indention. Also I've added some acks.
>> Did I screw something up?
> 
> We discourage people from rebasing their trees just before asking Linus
> to pull them unless they have a good reason.  Adding Acks is not
> necessarily a good reason.  It may be a different thing if you rewrite
> your tree (without changing it base) and, given that none of your
> actual patches changed, that would have worked for you.
> 
> In your case, since you haven't updated the branch (signal_v4) that I
> fetch for linux-next, its doubly bad as, after Linus' pulls your tree,
> I will have two copies of all those patches in my tree - which could
> easily lead to conflicts that I really don't need to have.
> 
> Also, note that the fact that the actual patches did not change at all
> means that either you missed some change that coudl have justified the
> rebase, or the rebase was unnecessary (since the things you are
> patching did not change).
> 

Thanks for the kind explanation.
It would be nice to see these rules written down somewhere.

Thanks,
//richard


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