linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git patches] 2.6.x libata updates
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510291229330.3348@g5.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4363CB60.2000201@pobox.com>



On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
> Even so, it's easy, to I'll ask him to test 2.6.14, 2.6.14-git1, and
> (tonight's upcoming) 2.6.14-git2 (with my latest pull included) to see if
> anything breaks.

Side note: one of the downsides of the new "merge lots of stuff early in 
the development series" approach is that the first few daily snapshots end 
up being _huge_. 

So the -git1 and -git2 patches are/will be very big indeed.

For example, patch-2.6.14-git1 literally ended up being a megabyte 
compressed. Right now my diff to 2.6.14 (after just two days) is 1.6MB 
compressed.

Admittedly, some of it is due to things like the MIPS merge, but the point 
I'm trying to make is that it makes the daily snapshot diffs a lot less 
useful to people who try to figure out where something broke.

Now, I've gotten several positive comments on how easy "git bisect" is to 
use, and I've used it myself, but this is the first time that patch users 
_really_ become very much second-class citizens, and you can't necessarily 
always do useful things with just the tar-trees and patches. That's sad, 
and possibly a really big downside.

Don't get me wrong - I personally think that the new merge policy is a 
clear improvement, but it does have this downside.

			Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2005-10-29 19:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-10-29 18:22 [git patches] 2.6.x libata updates Jeff Garzik
2005-10-29 19:14 ` Andrew Morton
2005-10-29 19:20   ` Jeff Garzik
2005-10-29 19:37     ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2005-10-29 20:09       ` Al Viro
2005-10-29 20:16       ` Jeff Garzik
2005-10-29 20:18       ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-10-29 21:01         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-30 15:46           ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-10-29 22:21       ` Andrew Morton
2005-10-29 22:30         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-30  0:55           ` Tony Luck
2005-10-30  2:28       ` Horst von Brand
2005-10-30 12:44       ` Rob Landley
2005-10-30 22:36         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-30 23:31           ` Rob Landley
2005-10-31  0:58             ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-31  2:35               ` Rob Landley
2005-10-31  7:46                 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-10-31  8:10                   ` David Lang
2005-10-31  8:28                     ` David Lang
2005-10-31  9:00                     ` Junio C Hamano
2005-10-31  9:13                       ` David Lang
2005-10-31  9:34                         ` Rob Landley
2005-10-31 11:45                           ` Giuseppe Bilotta
2005-10-31 17:49                             ` David Lang
2005-10-31 18:06                               ` Giuseppe Bilotta
2005-10-31  2:52               ` Rob Landley
2005-11-10  0:36               ` Matthias Urlichs
2005-10-30 23:59           ` Rob Landley
2005-10-31  0:16             ` Randy.Dunlap
2005-10-30 13:11       ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-31  3:55       ` David Lang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-18  2:15 Jeff Garzik
2006-01-18  2:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-18  5:18   ` Jeff Garzik
2006-01-03 16:43 Jeff Garzik
2006-01-03 16:51 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2006-01-03 16:56   ` Jeff Garzik
2006-01-03 17:32   ` Alan Cox
2006-01-03 17:43     ` Jeff Garzik
2006-01-03 18:35       ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2006-01-03 18:50         ` Alan Cox
2006-01-04 14:02       ` Alan Cox
2005-11-11 16:23 Jeff Garzik
2005-11-09  6:54 Jeff Garzik
2005-10-28  0:49 Jeff Garzik
2005-10-28 16:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-08-29  0:25 Jeff Garzik
2005-06-28 16:59 Jeff Garzik

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0510291229330.3348@g5.osdl.org \
    --to=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).