{"thread":{"id":"1569","subject":"Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?","startedAt":"2005-08-18T13:34:10Z","lastAt":"2005-08-18T13:41:06Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["Marco Costalba","Catalin Marinas"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"7500","messageId":"20050818133411.15529.qmail@web26306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","threadId":"1569","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?","fromName":"Marco Costalba","fromEmail":"mcostalba@yahoo.it","sentAt":"2005-08-18T13:34:10Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-18T13:34:10Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"mcostalba@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Catalin Marinas wrote:\n\n>>\n>>If I uderstand correctly you never commit patches from StGIT stack directly\n>>in your base git repository, in this example git HEAD, but you always round \n>>trip to MAIN.\n>\nWhen I say 'you always round trip to MAIN', I mean you send patches \nupstream and someone commits to MAIN, then you pull from MAIN.\n\nSorry if it was not clear.\n\n>\n>One usually doesn't maintain MAIN. That's an example for the Linux\n>kernel development where you can't control what get merged into MAIN.\n>\n>There is a bit of confusion here since you said in a previous e-mail\n>that more people can commit to the stable branch. In this case, you\n>would need a separate repository for stable with a maintainer pulling\n>changes from others.\n>\n\nWhen I said 'more people can commit to the stable branch' I meant more \npeople sends patches to a mantainer that commits the patches in a stable branch.\n\nSorry, peraphs also this was not clearly expressed.\n\n\n>>Then you don't have two git repository: HEAD and MAIN\n>>\n>>Infact there is only one git repository, MAIN, cloned on your box\n>>and called HEAD and with a StGIT stack added on top.\n>\n>\n>The StGIT usage idea is that you only know what patches you have on\n>top of a main repository. Since you expect your patches to be merged\n>upstream or just updated every time the main repository changes, it\n>might not make sense to commit the patches onto the base.\n>\n\nYes, you better explained what I was badly trying to say before.\n\n\n>\n>I need a bit more clarification about your work flow.\n>\n\nI was thinking at two different kind of workflow, one were you are tracking a \nremote repository ( Linux kernel project like ) and one as single developer with \nboth stable and develop lines ( qgit or StGIT ;-) projects like ). \n\nYou clarified me for both cases.\n\nThanks\nMarco\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nTired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around \nhttp://mail.yahoo.com \n"},{"id":"7501","messageId":"tnx7jej2wi5.fsf@arm.com","threadId":"1569","inReplyTo":"20050818133411.15529.qmail@web26306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com","subject":"Re: [RFC] Patches exchange is bad?","fromName":"Catalin Marinas","fromEmail":"catalin.marinas@gmail.com","sentAt":"2005-08-18T13:41:06Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-18T13:41:06Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"catalin.marinas@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Marco Costalba <mcostalba@yahoo.it> wrote:\n> I was thinking at two different kind of workflow, one were you are\n> tracking a remote repository ( Linux kernel project like ) and one\n> as single developer with both stable and develop lines ( qgit or\n> StGIT ;-) projects like ).\n\nThere is another option for the 2nd case, where you maintain both both\nstable and development. You could use 'git push' to the stable\nrepository (actually, more like a mirror) and make the\nStGIT-maintained repository track the changes from the stable one and\njust update it with 'stg pull'\n\n-- \nCatalin\n"}]}