>> This series of patches is based on the 'next' branch. > > The reason not to base on 'master' is...? > The reason it wasn't based on 'master' was that it depended on the commit: dir: create function count_slashes(), which was merged to 'next' a few days back. > The thing is that a topic built on 'next' cannot be merged down to > 'master' until _all_ other topics in 'next' graduate to 'master', > which may never happen. If you are depending on one or more topics, > please make sure to name them. Then we can > > (1) create a branch from the tip of 'master'; > (2) merge these topics you depend on into that branch; and then > (3) apply these patches. > I'll soon be updating this patch series and will create the new patch series in accordance with the above routine. > The topic still needs to wait until these other topis graduate, but > at least you would not be blocked by unrelated topics that way. > > You _might_ be building on 'next' because you want to make sure that > your topic works not just with master but also want to make sure > that there won't be any unexpected breakage when used with topics in > 'next', even though your topic does not depend on anything in 'next' > in particular. It is a good development discipline to pay attention > to other topics in flight and I applaud you for it if that is why > you based it on 'next'. But the right way to do it would be to > build your topic on 'master', and then in addition to testing the > topic by itself, also make a trial merge of your topic into 'next' > and test the result as well. > Thanks for making me aware about this as well. And will be following this before sending out the updated patch-series. Thanks, Prathamesh Chavan
