On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> Yes that is why I did it. I still use quilt for my tree because it works
> best for me, but together with all the i386 stuff I was over 230 patches
> and email clearly didn't scale well to that much.
Right. I'm actually surprised not more peole use git that way. It was
literally one of the _design_goals_ of git to have people use quilt a a
more "willy-nilly" front-end process, with git giving the true distributed
nature that you can't get from that kind of softer patch-queue like
system.
We discussed some quilt integration stuff, but nobody actually ended up
ever using both (except indirectly, as with the whole Andrew->Linus
stage). StGit kind of comes closest.
So I don't think your usage should be considered to be even strange. I
think it makes sense. I just think that everybody agrees that if we can do
it in chunks of a few tens of patches most of the time instead of chunks
of 225, everybody will have an easier time, if only because the latency
goes down, and it's just easier to react.
That said, the merges with Andrew are also sometimes in the 150+ patch
range, and merging with other git trees can sometimes bring in even more.
So I'm not claiming any hard limits or anything like that, just that in
general it's nicer to get updates trickle in over time rather than all at
once.
I suspect this was mostly a one-time startup-event.
Linus
-
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]
