Linville update wireless-2.6/everything

[John W. Linville]

On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 04:20:55PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 10:48 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 03:21:32PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:

> > > I don't have patches. I use git.
> > 
> > Tomato, tomato...  Ok, there is some difference --
> 
> The important difference is that a 'patch' can be committed many times
> in many different places in many different git trees (or branches).
> That's many _different_ git-commits. But only one patch.

This is a technical detail.  Getting the patch merged is the important
part, the point of the exercise.

> People who use git will base their work on a given commit. And if that
> commit suddenly disappears in a rebase or re-commit, and never makes it
> into Linus' tree, that's a pain.

Yes, pain that can be minimized downstream by following a simple git
procedure and following the principle of "merge early and often".

> > FWIW I haven't rebased 'everything' yet, although I do plan to rebase
> > on -rc4 soon.
> 
> Right. Which is why I chose _not_ to base my git tree on yours, but on
> Linus' tree.

...where a number of libertas patches are not currently available
(which was already true before last night's merging)...

> > I don't really see the conflict.  It just seems to me that the pain
> > is all mine -- when you are done I pull your tree, figure-out which
> > commits are new, and reapply them on top of whatever is current.
> > What is the big deal?
> 
> That's true to a certain extent, but I was trying to _avoid_ causing
> that pain. If you weren't keeping libertas patches in your patch-stack,
> then there would be no pain. You'd just have a clean tree to pull from.

The big "rename everthing libertas_ to lbs_" patch was already sent
toward 2.6.25.  Doesn't that render the whole "clean tree" theory moot?

I'm sorry, I just don't have the luxury of only sending pristine
commits to Linus.  I have to coordinate with jgarzik and davem, and
they usually rebase their trees before pushing to Linus in the merge
window anyway.  So I push them commits representing patches that
apply at the top of the stack.  That way your patches get merged,
even though your commits are lost.  It is the best I can do.

John
-- 
John W. Linville
linville at tuxdriver.com