Re: linux-next: unneeded merge in the security tree

From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date: Mar 12, 2013, 17:51 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXaf_wfmwpQ4O5v+n8vd4uwddDANyZna4ufK10JxZhSvA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzFLDcN-1GKae6Xqrns59K1xOD_HPzuv2Lv1__fZpqFMw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

>> Why not just force the head of the security tree to be v3.9-rc2?  Then
>> you don't end up creating a completely unnecessary merge commit, and
>> users who were at the previous head of the security tree will
>> experience a fast forward when they pull your new head.
>
> So I think that may *technically* be the right solution, but it's a
> rather annoying UI issue, partly because you can't just do it in a
> single operation (you can't do a pull of the tag to both fetch and
> fast-forward it), but partly because "git reset --hard" is also an
> operation that can lose history, so it's something that people should
> be nervous about, and shouldn't use as some kind of standard "let's
> just fast-forward to Linus' tree" thing.

In many cases, "git rebase x" does the exact same thing as "git reset --hard x", with an added safeguard: if you forgot to upstream something, it'll boil up on top of "x".

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds