# Status of git.git repository

2 messages from 2005-07-30 to 2005-08-04. Participants: Junio C Hamano, Petr Baudis.
Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/1366

## Junio C Hamano, 2005-07-30 02:11

Subject: Status of git.git repository
Message-ID: <7vhded6o0r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vhded6o0r.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net

```
I've been trying to streamline my workflow since I took it over
from Linus, and I think I am getting used to it.  So here is a
short summary of what I am doing in the git.git repository.

Right now, there are two branches on kernel.org git.git
repository.  I would not rewind "master" so if I find out any
screwups and need to do an emergency fix, that fix would go on
top of the tip of "master" (I just did one today X-< due to lack
of testing).

On the other hand, "pu" is rebased every time "master" advances.
They are queued patches I receive in e-mails, and they hopefully
will graduate to be part of "master" when I feel they look OK,
and I feel that objections from the list were non-issues.  Of
course some may drop out without graduating.  Please consider
seeing your patch in "pu" branch an ACK from me, but seeing it
sitting in "pu" for a long time is a sign of trouble.

By the way, do people mind my posting my own patches to the
list?  I keep the same in the "pu" (proposed updates) branch, so
if the list readers think I am just adding noise to the list
traffic, I would stop doing so, and instead just invite
interested people to browse the "pu" branch.

```

## Petr Baudis, 2005-08-04 22:26

Subject: Re: Status of git.git repository
Message-ID: <20050804222611.GE24479@pasky.ji.cz>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20050804222611.GE24479%40pasky.ji.cz
In-Reply-To: <7vhded6o0r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

```
Dear diary, on Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 04:11:48AM CEST, I got a letter
where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> told me that...
> By the way, do people mind my posting my own patches to the
> list?  I keep the same in the "pu" (proposed updates) branch, so
> if the list readers think I am just adding noise to the list
> traffic, I would stop doing so, and instead just invite
> interested people to browse the "pu" branch.

Browsing the "pu" branch may be bothersome and you won't ensure that the
related discussion stays in a single thread, and posting the patches
here makes them generally more visible, so I think it's a good idea to
keep doing so.

Cogito (and Git itself as well, I guess) does not handle those
"volatile" branches well at all - following them is difficult since
Cogito will think that you did some local commits and want to do a tree
merge. Would anyone consider doing

	if ref(updatebranch) == ref(master) then
		merge: always_fastforward
	else
		merge: perhaps_treemerge

a Bad Thing (tm)? It seems to me that it should do the right thing and
never get it wrong.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching
someone.  -- Alan Cox

```
