From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 12:31:52 GMT
Subject: Re: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0601091320420.2503@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90601090211j33479764q13c74df60033a061@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Martin Langhoff wrote:

> In a sense we are still exploring possible/desirable workflows and what 
> the missing pieces are. And yes, some thing don't quite make sense from 
> the outside, perhaps because they just don't or because we arent' 
> explaining them very well.

Maybe what is needed here is this:

T1 - T2 .. Tn .. Tp
  \         \      \
   \         M1     M2
    \       /      /
     B1 .. Bm .. Bo

where T1..Tp are the upstream commits, B1..Bo are the local commits, and
M1.. are the test merges just to make sure nothing breaks?

As long as the Mx commits resolve automatically, no need for an explicit 
merge in the Bx commits, since a pull from B into T will just recreate an 
Mx as next commit in T.

Kind of "throw away merge".

Ciao,
Dscho