On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 09:00:22AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:06:19PM +0400, Azat Khuzhin wrote: > > > > AFAIR it was against master. > > Yeah massive rename will do a lot of conflicts, I've just rebased them > > against maint without first patch and sent new patchset (v3). > > Great, thanks! > > For future information, if you are doing development, it's better to > use either the maint branch (for bug fixes) or the next branch. The > next branch is non-rewinding, so it's safe to do development against > it, and it's generally a few days ahead of the master branch, > especially after I've added a large number of patches. > > he basic idea is that if there are some end users which are using > e2fsprogs' master branch, while any patches that get merged into > "next" should be clean and safe and Bug Free(tm), that we give those > patches a few days for people to find bugs and really obvious/stupid > flaws that either (a) I made or that (b) I missed in my review before > those new commits "graduate" to master. Yeah, thanks for explanation Ted, I read about this, but I forgot to change branch before writing patches. Thanks, Azat. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
