Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 20 March 2007, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>> I find using a patch queue useful though for submitting things >>> upstream. A good example is our QEMU changes. It's a real pain to >>> break apart the SVN history into individual patches. >>> >> Why not just extract diffs with 'svn diff'? That's what I did/do. >> > > Just a few random thoughts on this: > > - if you have multiple changesets in svn that you want to submit as > a single patch, it's useful to only have to do the folding once. >
Well, one can do that with git too (on a separate branch). > - Having the changeset as a patch means that multiple developers > can add their Acked-by: and Signed-off-by: by editing the description > in the patch file, while you can't easily change an existing changeset > comment. E.g. I require everyone with write access to add their own > Signed-off-by:, while I add mine when I look at the patches I want > to send out. > Again, you can with git. > - When a developer checks in a new changeset, I found that often there > are formal problems in it, e.g. the comment doesn't follow the rules > for kernel commits, or there is some coding style problem. In a > patch file, you can trivially fix that. > Unfortunately that happens a lot here, and it's definitely easier with quilt. I'll hold off the decision and think about it some more. Maybe the problem will go away, as Anthony suggests. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
