On Thursday 2008-05-01 00:10, Andrew Morton wrote:
quoted text
>> 
>> Andrew, the latter thing is a very good point. For me personally, the fact
>> that -mm is not available via git is the major obstacle for trying your
>> tree more frequently than just a few times per year.
>
>Every -mm release if available via git://, as described in the release
>announcements.
[...]
quoted text
>> How difficult it
>> would be to switch to git for you?
>
>Fatal, I expect.  A tool which manages source-code files is just the wrong
>paradigm.  I manage _changes_ against someone else's source files.

Would you mind using stgit? That you way have the queue patch
functionality, yet a simple git-push -f will send the whole
patch stack over to a repo (without the stgit bits that is),
leaving what looks like a regular tree with just lots of
recent commits. Does not even need extra scripts to do a
patchset->git conversion.

quoted text
>> For busy (or lazy) people like myself, the big problem with linux-next are
>> the frequent merge breakages, when pulling the tree stops with "you are in
>> the middle of a merge conflict".
>
>Really?  Doesn't Stephen handle all those problems?  It should be a clean
>fetch each time?

Indeed, assuming the remote is set up and you have a local branch,
`git reset --hard mm/master` after a fetch is the thing.
But be sure not to have any changed files.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/