# RE: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree 3 messages from 2006-01-09 to 2006-01-09. Participants: Brown, Len, Martin Langhoff, Johannes Schindelin. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/3018 ## Brown, Len, 2006-01-09 07:34 Subject: RE: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/F7DC2337C7631D4386A2DF6E8FB22B3005A136FE%40hdsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com ``` Martin, I appologize for using the phrase "completely insane". The rebase proposal caught me somewhat off-guard and I was expressing surprise -- hopefully not taken as insult. Further, I thank you for your thoughful follow-up. While I don't expect it to become a routine occurnece for me, I do see that rebase has utility in some situations. -Len - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ``` ## Martin Langhoff, 2006-01-09 10:11 Subject: Re: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree Message-ID: <46a038f90601090211j33479764q13c74df60033a061@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/46a038f90601090211j33479764q13c74df60033a061%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` On 1/9/06, Brown, Len wrote: > I appologize for using the phrase "completely insane". > The rebase proposal caught me somewhat off-guard and > I was expressing surprise -- hopefully not taken as insult. > > Further, I thank you for your thoughful follow-up. No worries... and no offence taken! 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. In a sense, we do have a bit of a challenge explaining what how all the parts fit together, even to bk old timers it seems. > While I don't expect it to become a routine occurnece for me, > I do see that rebase has utility in some situations. As long as you've got enough tools to use a workflow that fits you, it's all good. cheers, martin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ``` ## Johannes Schindelin, 2006-01-09 12:31 Subject: Re: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.63.0601091320420.2503%40wbgn013.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 ```