On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 11:47 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, James. > > James Bottomley wrote: > > No ... postmerge trees are held by maintainers for irreconcilable tree > > conflicts. You run your standard tree, which can fire at any time in > > the merge window and your postmerge one which pulls in the entangled > > tree and adds your patches on top. This can only go after the > > conflicting subsystem has also been pulled into linus head. > > > >> Out of curiousity, is there any reason not to use more standard git > >> workflow? > > > > This is a standard workflow ... > > Ah... poor wording from me. I meant the one based on merging and > monotonic commit accumulation without rebasing. But that's not really possible here ... the only way to combine the two incompatible trees now while maintaining bisectability is to hide a non trivial patch in the merge point ... that's the worst practice of all. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
