Dear Stefano, In message <5044a44f.2050...@denx.de> you wrote: > > One of them uses u-boot-imx for his development, and of course after I > rebased my tree he got into trouble, due to using a commit that does not > exist anymore.
Thanks for bringing up this topic. > Albert has described the way we are currently using in > http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/CustodianGitTrees. I think you konow > very well and it is the way we follow, and we usually rebase our tree > after u-boot-arm is merged by Wolgang in mainline. I want to discuss > here if we really need it and if this is the correct way to do. I think it is wrong to rebase any tree for which it is not very clearly and lodly announced that this tree gets rebased on a more or less regular base. linux-next is such an example - we allknow it gets rebased frequently, so we can arrange with it (though I have to admit that I dn't like it, and that I've been bitten myself more than once by this). For u-boot-*, most users I know are not aware of any rebasing policy. > My big question is if we should not to come back using "git pull" to > downstream mainline from Wolfgang's tree, instead of continuos rebase. I > know that we switched to rebase to avoid a lot of "git merge commits", > but maybe this is not so bad as rebasing. I would prefer to have at least rebase-free "master" branches in all custodian repositories. It is perfectly OK to have working branches, and to rebase these as work progresses. But for the master branches, a rebase should be more or less tabu. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
