From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lf1-f51.google.com (mail-lf1-f51.google.com [209.85.167.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0766A3FC2 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 23:26:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f51.google.com with SMTP id k5so27639131lfu.4 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:26:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=GU9nsMFQJFE6OFRxd34e/iYKywm5M9delJ3nFAw+Cp8=; b=VwbXEatuGgc+B6rsiA8CmaK92X9mjT9uO56EUU47xH0/F3mY2lmPxohsofjBPlVSgl vE1dGGL4adB8gWGXMS0bb4b+oVvT7UpK5JXaq+ZDWjIDOU31mY7EwByyX233QN/2ea0d IGRGolewegq3LJmnG3fHGnBSPoZrO8jSZjEaMLFqR/+M3g3+8jwQBBQuclJhT4BkoI0/ Q8HWzorTmuWnPqeOTZPLiva9tvjhwFztn3FJBI7VfyXLh1NOduX4bzbznUjug7uIQWEI umVzo0sPP/2Gb+F/igz9YFR7U2xp0CbzUPSkfxRJhU4Xr/vseCIXeX2EQlvNAsyDPsQo sLcA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=GU9nsMFQJFE6OFRxd34e/iYKywm5M9delJ3nFAw+Cp8=; b=gG5DisgT2AJpxwOxnTP2pvSOqqvo3Pb4a1kMWf3gSHMqDvC49wsXgJOMehubHvM2Q6 OarKbJw02y4pXbXnq9htGTYbxp9FU2898K4xm5B7dFZaEUQQ3YoFzLAoRgNf+nj37I1X 1CECSHXPadnuVZ2flZ98lFE4rP6UQ86ptJl9oMbHLwI9ofH2W8VUcIvwNsk343Ai+KLz BLnFDtDmxDlr7SQkf4C4VirPujCTsm6SDy7yNd+2Z6ej0ehvwT0sNqq+BttBaeUP96Yu TVdRgehf/Ry97RUEGmfX4Y4nN766SRv10q27quhqBjdDLqtOVWwjXCNcpPTcow2Q3LVh BgNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532qXUzMa5wOREAG9WwppBNyG0c68fGEEXTZ5tZ1MzRVKLh+WUzE kn4noi6sWfXXmhmdW3dB/ty6oqfWpWQk9g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwFe7So9XHs5gU7un+ZSrWiq/5MRx6l5zEmte47KAPS0ObFghEOtxN60bKvpeqdpTbM2gpeUg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3e04:: with SMTP id i4mr12259775lfv.163.1630279607033; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kari-VirtualBox (85-23-89-224.bb.dnainternet.fi. [85.23.89.224]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z3sm220684lfd.38.2021.08.29.16.26.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 02:26:44 +0300 From: Kari Argillander To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Konstantin Komarov , ntfs3@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Ntfs3 git repo in github should not back merge Message-ID: <20210829232644.s2w3ggkyl2usmo55@kari-VirtualBox> References: <20210825192746.ryi2vzn5gz4myxri@kari-VirtualBox> <20210830082308.649f2026@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ntfs3@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210830082308.649f2026@canb.auug.org.au> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 08:23:08AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Konstantin, > > On Wed, 25 Aug 2021 22:27:46 +0300 Kari Argillander wrote: > > > > I notice that you have made back-merge in ntfs3 git repo in github. > > This should not be done without good reason and there is none in this > > case. If there is reason you should also write good merge commit for it. > > This is correct, but in this case with an initial submission, Linus is > likely to be a bit easier on you. Just explain that you realise that > you probably should not have done the back merge. Also, if you are > going to merge another branch you should not use the github web > interface to do it. It does not allow you to produce a useful commit > message for the merge commit. Linus has expressed this recently about > another tree that is maintained on github (unfortunately in a private > message, so it is not archived anywhere). > > > Here is link which you can read about back-merges. If you have any > > questions you can always ask. > > > > 01.org/linuxgraphics/gfx-docs/drm/maintainer/rebasing-and-merging.html#merging-from-sibling-or-upstream-trees > > Also available in the kernel tree at Documentation/maintainer/... > > > You could also go check some other trees how they do it. Usually there > > is next/master/main/for-next which will be repo which will contain stuff > > for next-merge window. This is usually based on rc1, rc2, rc3 depending > > when you put first patches to next merge window. As you based your > > branch top of the rc5. > > Again with an initial submission this should not be a problem. And, in > any case, varies among maintainer quite a bit. But -rc1/2 is usually a > good place to start your next round of development. > > > Because your master branch is for next you could have rebased your > > branch top of the rc7 if you want to but that is kinda pointless. You > > could always fix little mistakes in next branch with rebase, but you > > should propably info this action to ntfs3 mailing list. > > Do *not* rebase a published branch except in exceptional circumstances. > All branches included in linux-next should be considered published. I have a guestion also then. Right now situation is that there is examaple missing Reviewed-by tags from commits. What should we do about thouse? Or what to do if someone forget signed-off? You also said earlier that rebasing is ok in this message: https://lore.kernel.org/ntfs3/20210816063225.22d992ff@canb.auug.org.au/ I understand that rebasing should be avoided at almoust all cost, but what are the screw ups that has to be fixed with it? Thank you for answering and clarifying things. > > > The idea is that this repo has very clean history always when it get > > merged to Linus tree. Also developers who work with ntfs3 can see > > everything in one eye. > > > > Example take a look Ext4 dev (for-next) branch > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git/log/?h=dev > > You see that this is based on rc2. Theodore will create pull-request > > based on this when he creates pull-request. Very clean history and no > > back-merges. > > Also no rebasing (that I can remember). > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell