On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 07:47:01AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:35:05PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > Wait, what do you mean by "non-rebaseable"? I think you mean > > > "non-bisectable" right? > > > > I mean, the branch will not be rebased to fixup errors in the middle. > > Like the Linus' tree, and the tip/net trees. For these branches that > > cannot afford to rebase, bug fixes always get appended rather than get > > folded into the buggy commit. > > > > For the non-rebaseable branches, I'll first build test the branch HEAD, > > and iff it has build errors, go back to locate the first commit that > > introduces the errors. This way, it can avoid sending out pointless > > warnings about known bugs that are eventually fixed up in the HEAD. > > None of my trees and branches should ever be rebased, unless something > really wrong goes on. I think I've only had to ever do this once, for > one branch, in the past years that I've been doing this. Got it, thanks! Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
