Re: [alsa-devel] HG -> GIT migration

[Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>]

At Wed, 21 May 2008 11:25:25 -0700 (PDT),
david@lang.hm wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 21 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> > [ The corrollary to this all is that when downstream does a merge, think
> >  about what the merge message can say. How would you descibe the merge?
> >
> >  Can you give a good description of what you merged, and why? That's one
> >  thing that merging with releases can give you: you can say "merge with
> >  release 'xyz'", and people actually understand the *meaning* of it. Your
> >  merge message makes sense - and that implies that the merge itself
> >  likely made sense.
> >
> >  If you cannot explain what and why you merged, you probably shouldn't be
> >  merging - that's a good rule of thumb right there! Maybe that rule in
> >  itself should already be seen as sufficient ]
> 
> one thing that you have missed in your explination in this thread 
> (although you have made the point in other threads) is that subsystem 
> maintainers have the fear that there are other changes that will interfere 
> with their stuff and want to catch it early.
> 
> per your instructions in prior threads, what they should do is to have a 
> seperate branch on their system that they use as a throw-away branch to 
> pull from your tree, and from their tree to spot problems. As they find 
> problems they can then address them (cherry pick, or whatever)
> 
> so it's not that the ALSA people should only look at your tree at the 
> merge points, it's that they shouldn't pollute their tree that they are 
> going to publish to you with this checking.

Ah, that's what I missed.  This suggestion actually makes sense.


Takashi