Lets define this and publish it on the website as our procedure, this is under review and is open for comments ODP Release Process <https://docs.google.com/a/linaro.org/document/d/1jCWRW9yHbzNp8dmZ1X8ZNQB1YzKyZbipoYY101Uhkhg/edit?usp=drive_web>
On 5 May 2015 at 07:20, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > *From:* ext Maxim Uvarov [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, May 04, 2015 8:20 PM > > *To:* Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Reverts in the repo ... > > > > > > > > On 4 May 2015 at 13:40, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ext Maxim Uvarov [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 4:24 PM > > To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Reverts in the repo ... > > > > On 04/30/2015 14:24, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > > .. are not user friendly. > > > > > > 1) git pull (in master) > > > 2) git checkout api-next > > > 3) git pull > > > > > > Results conflict in packet_io.h: > > > > > > <<<<<<< HEAD > > > * @note dev name loop is specially pktio reserved name for device > used > > for > > > * testing. Usually it's loop back interface. > > > ======= > > > * @note The device name "loop" is a reserved name for a loopback > > device used > > > * for testing purposes. > > >>>>>>>> 0162f9e00e2b55a45aa391be512672a06ac03c30 > > > > > > .. and now *every* user need to fix this. This is an easy fix, but that > > may not be always the case. > > No, it's because you have that local change. Others will not see this. > > The same lines (of two versions of Bill's v1 and v2 commits) conflict also > on branches that do not modify packet_io.h at all. I think that everyone > that have pulled api-next after the v1 but before the v2 see the issue > (when pulling now the v2). > > > -Petri > > > > Petri, you should not use git pull for api-next. It's development branch > and it supposed that you do something like that: > > git fetch > > git rebase -i FETCH_HEAD > > Maxim. > > > > > > Master and api-next should have the same work flow - either reverts are > acceptable on both branches or on neither. > > > > In general, history rewriting should be avoided on public branches. Just > fix mistakes with new patches/commits on top. Actual rewriting should be > needed very rarely - e.g. to undo accidental addition of garbage > (files/data that was never meant to be in version control). > > > > -Petri > > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > > -- Mike Holmes Technical Manager - Linaro Networking Group Linaro.org <http://www.linaro.org/> *│ *Open source software for ARM SoCs
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
