[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Fix possible uninitialized variable compiler warning.

[Haavard Skinnemoen]

On 10/11/06, Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On 10/11/06, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> > In message <528646bc0610102309j6fcf7ed4n74e6af179d21f42b at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:

> > This assumes that the "other" repository is kept in  a  clean  state,
> > but  this  is  usually  not  the case. What happens is this: somebody
> > starts working in his own repo, and does so for a long  time  without
> > review  on  the  list. Over time, a lot of problems in his code sneak
> > in. When he finally announces his repo and ask to have it merged into
> > the public tree he says: Ummm, now it's too late,  it  would  be  too
> > much  work  to  fix  all  these  issues and to re-do all the checkins
>
> True, but that's not your issue.  Flame away when someone posts out of
> date patches.  The holder of the non-mainline tree is responsible to
> make sure his submissions to mainline are clean.

I think it's common practice to have a separate branch for stuff to
merge into mainline. Such a branch (called "for-wolfgang", for
example) should be based off the latest mainline head and contain one
commit for each logical change, i.e. the same rules apply here as for
regular patches. After it has been either merged or NAK'ed by
Wolfgang, it can be discarded and re-built, possibly with a different
set of changes and based off a later mainline head.

This way, the master branch in the non-mainline tree can be kept
linear without all the noise from pulling, reverting and fixing being
visible in the mainline repository.

> > [remember the case of the missing CHANGELOG entries in Jon's  tree  -
> > this  cannot  be  fixed  afterwards as these have to be done for each
> > checkin].

With a non-linear merge branch, it's easy to alter existing commit
messages, including CHANGELOG entries.

Haavard