On Feb. 12, 2008, 18:36 +0200, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Miller wrote: >> This is why, with the networking, we've just tossed all of the network >> driver stuff in there too. I can rebase freely, remove changesets, >> rework them, etc. and this causes a very low amount of pain for Jeff >> Garzik and John Linville. > > > s/very low/not low/ > > Rebasing is always a pain, and John and I both agreed the other day that > you do it too often. > > I've complained about this before, too... but figured this was just > another thing I was getting ignored on, and so life moved on. But don't > try to sell rebasing as "low pain". > > Rebasing makes the history all nice and pretty, but by totalling > flattening the history, trashing all the commit ids (and rewriting > associated metadata), you create obvious downstream problems.
FWIW, when I rebase branches in my tree that others depend on I keep tags on the old heads for reference. Once the work-in-progress is done (e.g. tree pulled upstream) the reference tags can be cleaned up and the tree can be pruned. Benny > > Rebasing is low impact only if you don't have git downstream people. > Otherwise, you're just treating it as a useful quilt clone, really. > > Jeff > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
