On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 16:08 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > Linus, please pull from > > ra.kernel.org:/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git kvm-updates/3.4 > > (ssh URL as git.kernel.org is down at the moment) to receive the KVM > updates for the 3.4 merge window. Changes include timekeeping > improvements, support for assigning host PCI devices that share > interrupt lines, s390 user-controlled guests, a large ppc update, and > random fixes. I wonder if Linus missed this one ... :-) But that's not the point of the email ... Avi, I have a bit of a problem with the way you manage your tree(s). It appears to me that you have on one side, a tree that has all of KVM dev. history for years, which is used as a parent by your sub-maintainers such as Alex, and as your main dev. tree. However, that -tree- is not related to Linus, and whenever you do a pull request, you basically rebase patches on top of a different tree which is derived from Linus. That means that everything gets constantly rebased, and it makes life very much harder for us working with this. For our own dev, we have to essentially work on trees that derive from Linus, my own -next branch, Alex's -next branch, whatever you have going on etc... and updating/rebasing our own local WIP patches is extremely painful because there is never a recent common ancestor between your trees (and other deriving from it such as Alex) and anything else. Is there any reason why you keep working that way other than a bad habit ? :-) It would be much easier for everybody involved if your WIP development was always based on a recent ancestor and that you did not rebase it, meaning that Linus would just "pull" it and everybody would resync cleanly after every merge window. Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
