Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 09:19:58PM -0500, Dan Zwell wrote: > > > This patch is againts Shawn Pearce's "pu" branch. > > Don't do that. The code in 'pu' is a mess of half-working features. If > your patch is accepted, then it has to be picked apart from those > half-working features that aren't being accepted (which hopefully isn't > hard if nobody has been working in the same area, but can be quite > ugly). Base your work on 'master' if possible, or 'next' if it relies > on features only in next. If it relies on some topic branch that is > _only_ in pu, then mention explicitly which topic. And even when you base work on things in next, don't base it on the tip of next. Base it on a specific topic that is merged into next. Next is also a mess of features, but they are more likely to be in a working state than the features in pu. Topics in next will merge to master at different times. If your changes depend on more than one topic that may make it more difficult for the maintainer to merge your topic to master. Fortunately In Dan's case the only topic in pu that impacted git-add--interactive was his dz/color-addi topic, so this probably applies to the tip of it just as well as it does to the tip of pu. -- Shawn. - 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
