From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752593AbXCHRMJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:12:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752585AbXCHRMJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:12:09 -0500 Received: from mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.4]:50681 "EHLO mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752570AbXCHRMH (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:12:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:12:04 -0500 (EST) From: James Morris X-X-Sender: jmorris@d.namei To: Eric Paris cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vyekkirala@trustedcs.com, cxzhang@watson.ibm.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add xfrm policy change auditing to pfkey_spdget In-Reply-To: <1173370815.31047.134.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: References: <1172861484.31047.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070307.154316.68038380.davem@davemloft.net> <20070307.160740.77057241.davem@davemloft.net> <1173370815.31047.134.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Eric Paris wrote: > which didn't have my fix up because i didn't commit it to my local > branch. Is there a better way to get a diff between my miller tree and > 'everything in the branch I have checked out even if it is not > committed'? I'd suggest you commit all your changes in local branches, then export them as emails via git-format-patch for posting. Something like: davem-upstream [1] +- for-davem [2] +- for-davem-prep [3] Do all of your work in [3], so you can manage the queue of patches there before merging/applying them into [2] as a final patch series. So, if one of the commits in [3] needs fixing, you can, for example, export commits up to that with git-format-patch, git-reset --hard to the broken commit, fix, compile, test then reapply the exported commits. Then, once it's all ready, merge into [2] (or export & apply to avoid merge commits). This is just one possible workflow. There are probably several better. - James -- James Morris