From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 381D614E0 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 19:40:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [66.63.167.143]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D61457CF for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 19:40:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1536176428.3627.28.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: James Bottomley To: Jiri Kosina Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 20:40:28 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1536142432.8121.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20180905113715.GJ9781@sirena.org.uk> <20180905150315.GA10819@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180905115008.22e3d21f@gandalf.local.home> <20180905162007.GO4225@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1536165914.3627.17.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Distribution kernel bugzillas considered harmful List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 21:25 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018, James Bottomley wrote: > > > We do this in SCSI as well, but only if the tree hasn't yet been  > > submitted to Linus.  The technical term is folding.  It's > > obviously better to fix buggy commits that haven't gone upstream > > because it improves bisectability. > > We are drifting away a bit here, but now that you have mentioned it, > let me add a datapoint to this -- it's actually causing issues to > our workflow, as we have scsi.git as one of the upstreams [1], and > when you rebase, it blows up our git workflow and we have to fixup > things manually. Describe the issues and we'll try to come up with a fix, but on the whole you should regard the scsi trees somewhat similarly to linux- next: it's our proposal for a patch set but we may update it. > So if you are aware of your tree having downstreams, and care about > not breaking them and want to be nice to them, you shouldn't rebase > that tree [2]. Well, I wasn't aware of this one, but I'm sure we can come up with a functional workflow once I understand what's happening with the downstream tree. James > [1] there are some funny technical details, but in basic principle > it's exactly like that > > [2] https://yarchive.net/comp/linux/git_rebase.html > > Thanks, >