On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 16:03 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Also, more trees please ... :-) > > Please add the 'NEXT' branch of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git > > to your list. This is a throwaway meta-branch that is rebased often. > > The 'master' branch of libata-dev.git always contains the base commit > from torvalds/linux-2.6.git from which all other branches are based. I > never ever commit to the 'master' branch, only update it from > torvalds/linux-2.6.git. > > > Andrew, > > I will continue to maintain the 'ALL' branch exactly as before. It may > contain changes not suitable for 'NEXT', but suitable for -mm testing. > > In my new development process, things will almost always land in 'ALL' > before 'NEXT'. So does this indicate the meaning of upstream and upstream-fixes is still the same? I always took upstream-fixes to be bug fixes for this -rc and upstream as queued for the next merge window, in which case NEXT would be the union of those two sets? James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
