On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Olivier Galibert <galibert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > You say "don't rebase on the most recent kernel version". Andi seems > to accept that going forwards. You say "use topic branches that are > based on whatever kernel version you had at the time, I'll do the > merge". That's ok too. His remaining question is "what do I do with > broken patches _in_the_topic_branch_?". He wants to > amend/merge/split/reorder within the topic branch so that the branch > itself is bisectable. So what should be done there? If the patches have problems, then make a new topic branch and redo them there, or reorder, amend, squash, whatever inside the original branch. The problem comes once you open that branch out for other people to pull from, or if that branch had pulled patches from someone else. At that point you're destroying the history that other people are now already sharing, in a meta-data sense (changing the sha1), as well as invalidating whatever test points that people may have had on those commits. In short, don't rewrite public history. If you want to share out your works-in-progress, just let people know that those branches of yours are volatile and not to be trusted. But you can't pull someone else's public history, and then make it volatile; subtle trouble ensues. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
