* linux-next: back merge of Linus' tree into the vfio tree
@ 2013-09-05 23:08 Stephen Rothwell
2013-09-05 23:14 ` Alex Williamson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-09-05 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Williamson; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 361 bytes --]
Hi Alex,
I noticed that you have back merged Linus' tree into yours. Linus
usually takes a dim view of that - especially when there is no
explanation in the merge commit message. i.e. you shouldn't to that
unless you really need to - and then you should explain why you did it.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: back merge of Linus' tree into the vfio tree
2013-09-05 23:08 linux-next: back merge of Linus' tree into the vfio tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-09-05 23:14 ` Alex Williamson
2013-09-06 3:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Williamson @ 2013-09-05 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel
On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 09:08 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> I noticed that you have back merged Linus' tree into yours. Linus
> usually takes a dim view of that - especially when there is no
> explanation in the merge commit message. i.e. you shouldn't to that
> unless you really need to - and then you should explain why you did it.
Hmm, I was hoping that wouldn't be a problem, especially with no
conflicts in the merge. I did it because the first commit after the
merge in my next tree depends on PCI changes that have already been
merged by Linus. Re-basing is an even bigger sin and I felt it better
to do a merge than ask for two pulls or add an unbuild-able commit to my
next tree. How do you suggest that I resolve this? Thanks,
Alex
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: back merge of Linus' tree into the vfio tree
2013-09-05 23:14 ` Alex Williamson
@ 2013-09-06 3:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-09-06 3:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Williamson; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1134 bytes --]
Hi Alex,
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:14:29 -0600 Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 09:08 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > I noticed that you have back merged Linus' tree into yours. Linus
> > usually takes a dim view of that - especially when there is no
> > explanation in the merge commit message. i.e. you shouldn't to that
> > unless you really need to - and then you should explain why you did it.
>
> Hmm, I was hoping that wouldn't be a problem, especially with no
> conflicts in the merge. I did it because the first commit after the
> merge in my next tree depends on PCI changes that have already been
> merged by Linus. Re-basing is an even bigger sin and I felt it better
> to do a merge than ask for two pulls or add an unbuild-able commit to my
> next tree. How do you suggest that I resolve this?
See above ... you should have said all that in the merge commit message.
I guess that you should just own it now and explain it to Linus when you
ask him to pull your tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-09-06 3:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-09-05 23:08 linux-next: back merge of Linus' tree into the vfio tree Stephen Rothwell
2013-09-05 23:14 ` Alex Williamson
2013-09-06 3:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).