On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 02:23:53PM -0400, Sean wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 10:20:10 +0100
> Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The point I'm making is that for some things, keeping the changes as
> > patches until they're ready is far easier, more worthwhile and flexible
> > than having them simmering in some git tree somewhere.
>
> It's not really easier, just different. Git allows you to make a
> "topic branch" to keep separate items that need to bake before going
> upstream without being mixed in with all your other worked. This
> allows you to continue to pull in upstream changes to make sure that
> the patch series still applies cleanly and doesn't need updates etc.
>
> Of course you may be more comfortable with other tools, but Git _does_
> make it easy and practical to do the same thing.
Before people disagree with my statement (and I'm referring to all the
replies so far), maybe they should talk to Thomas who pioneered the
genirq changes to find out why he decided to work with patches rather
than a git repository?
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
