Hi, I like the idea, but I think it's too verbose. Perhaps something along these lines? 1. In general, base your patches on 'master'. 2. If your patch is a bugfix try to base it on 'maint'. If the bug's in 'master, but not in 'maint' also, base it on 'master'. 3. If you're working on a feature, some of whose patches are already in 'pu', base your work on the tip of the last commit in your topic branch (See THIS). If it's a minor correction, you might want to add a note asking the maintainer to squash it into the previous commit. 4. If you're working on an elaborate feature that depends on many commits in 'pu', maintain a public branch based on 'pu', and periodically post patches to the mailing list for feedback (all based on 'pu'). You might have to rebase/ wait before it's finally merged. THIS: > + work on the tip of the topic. "log --first-parent master..pu" would be > + a good way to find the tips of topic branches. + "The grandparent of this merge commit is your latest commit in this topic. This is the commit you should base your patch on." -- Ram -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html