Re: Updates to powerpc.git

On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 10:20 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:08:32AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

quoted

Kumar,

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 07:58:38 -0500 Kumar Gala [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

What is your intent with the 'master' branch?  I hope you do NOT plan  
on ever rebasing it.  I assume if a patch gets into master and we drop  
it you'll do a git-revert of it?

"Ever" is such a strong word.  Even Paul on occasion rebased his master
branch.  I see no reason why Ben could not run his master (or maybe
better named "test") branch as a place that patches come and go and his
"next" branch as something that never (or very rarely) gets rebased with
commits progressing from master (test) to next when he is satisfied with
them. People should then base further work in the "next" branch.

I was under the impression that there was some consensus that -next
branches should be used for unstable experiments.  Am I mistaken?

Yes,  you are.  It's slightly confusing.  -next branches are for things
decidedly going into the "next" release of the kernel.  If they are
unstable, they aren't really proven to be ready then.

josh