Re: why no -mm git tree?

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Coywolf Qi Hunt <qiyong@fc-cn.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:44:51PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Coywolf Qi Hunt <qiyong@fc-cn.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Why don't use a -mm git tree?
> > >
> > 
> > Because everthing would take me 100x longer?
> 
> Really? So does Linus?
> 

Linus does a totally different thing from me.

He reverts about one patch a month.  I drop tens a day.

He never _alters_ patches.  2.6.15-mm1 had about 200 patches which modify
earlier patches and which get rolled up into the patch-which-they-modify
before going upstream.

He never alters the order of patches.

etc.

> > 
> > I'm looking into generating a pullable git tree for each -mm.  Just as a
> > convenience for people who can't type "ftp".
> 
> That doesn't help much if it's only for each -mm.
> If you make git commits for each each patch merged in, then
> we can always run the `current' -mm git tree.

Ah.  If you're suggesting that the -mm git tree have _patches_ under git,
and the way of grabbing the -mm tree is to pull everything and to then
apply all the patches under the patches/ directory then yeah, that would
work.

But my tree at any random point in time is a random piece of
doesn't-even-compile-let-alone-run crap, believe me.  Often not all the
patches even apply.  I don't think there's much point in exposing people to
something like that.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/