* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > So i'd argue to not backmerge during the merge window (and i have stopped > > doing that myself a few cycles ago, and it clearly helped things) - but in > > any case it's certainly no big deal and up to Linus i guess. > > What i do instead is that once Linus pulls from me i pull back immediately > to test, and if it's fine i base further subsystem patches on that and test > the heck out of the combination from that point on. A sidenote: this is only advisable if the testing in the subsystem tree is strong, if there were many changes with interactions and if Linus's tree is still in its stable phase (like now). For slower-pace subsystems it's often good to be even more conservative with backmerges: to wait until -rc1 with any backmerges and to to generally not backmerge non-rc-release versions of Linus's tree. That way the development commits and the followup fix commits stay in one linear branch of history, with no backmerge inbetween, easily bisectable and testable on a stable base all the way. Thanks, Ingo -- 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
