On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Greg KH wrote: > Yes, I can switch back to going off of the -rcN-gitM markings that I was > using in the past. If I do that does it make it easier for you? > > And yes, you are right, this is a constant rebase, and that's wrong on > my part. That's exactly the problem. I don't mind rebasing for each -rcN; in fact many of the early -rc kernels often contain important bug fixes so I'm glad to have them. But rebasing more often than that becomes increasingly inconvenient. > This makes me reconsider the fact that I'm using quilt for all of this. > Perhaps if I switch to a git tree, it would all be easier for people > like you? Would you prefer that? I'm happy either way (although by now I'm quite used to using quilt and not so accustomed to git -- I haven't tried guilt). Of course, other people may feel differently. > For stuff like my staging tree, I'm almost convinced that switching to > git makes more sense as keeping that many patches in quilt is a mess and > I don't ever end up rebasing anything or deleting any patches in the > middle anymore. > > For USB, yeah, I think it's also time to switch over as well. What do > you think? Let's ask some other people on the USB list (CC'ed). My main concern is to avoid rebasing too often, whichever source-code management system is used. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
