Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 22:33:40 +1000
- From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
Hi Pierre, On Tue, 13 May 2008 12:47:45 +0200 Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > That's correct. But I've always made sure that for-linus is the base for > for-andrew (now next), so that should not be necessary. What it allows me to do, though, is drop your "next" tree if things go really bad without dropping fixes for Linus' current tree that you deem necessary. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgpCqPuGe3S3l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- From: Andrew Morton
- Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- From: Pierre Ossman
- Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- From: Stephen Rothwell
- Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- From: Pierre Ossman
- git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] cpuset: limit the input of cpuset.sched_relax_domain_level
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH]: Sparc64 immediate values
- Previous by thread: Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next
- Next by thread: [PATCH] Handle invalid ACPI SLIT table
- Index(es):