Re: [PATCH 00/21] replacement for dt/refs-backend-lmdb v7 patch 04/33

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 07:22 +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 03/24/2016 07:47 AM, David Turner wrote:
> > [...]
> > I incorporated your changes into the lmdb backend.  To make merging
> > later more convenient, I rebased on top of pu -- I think this
> > mainly
> > depends on jk/check-repository-format, but I also included some
> > fixes
> > for a couple of tests that had been changed by other patches.
> 
> I think rebasing changes on top of pu is counterproductive. I believe
> that Junio had extra work rebasing your earlier series onto a merge
> of
> the minimum number of topics that it really depended on. There is no
> way
> that he could merge the branch in this form because it would imply
> merging all of pu.
> 
> See the zeroth section of SubmittingPatches [1] for the guidelines.

I'm a bit confused because 
[PATCH 18/21] get_default_remote(): remove unneeded flag variable

doesn't do anything on master -- it depends on some patch in pu.  And
we definitely want to pick up jk/check-repository-format (which doesn't
include whatever 18/21 depends on).

So what do you think our base should be?

--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]