| To: | Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: New XFS git tree on oss.sgi.com |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:26:45 -0500 |
| Cc: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <492CE189.2000304@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <492BA7AD.5080007@xxxxxxx> <20081125081644.GA20644@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <492C9FB9.3090204@xxxxxxx> <20081126020009.GF6291@disturbed> <492CC287.3070709@xxxxxxx> <20081126040840.GG6291@disturbed> <492CE189.2000304@xxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 04:41:29PM +1100, Timothy Shimmin wrote: > I was just thinking that if an external developer is working on a clone of > say the master branch and they have a fix, that they might post a patch > and say where sgi can pull from (the developer's tree) to receive the > patch(es) > as an easier way to bring stuff in. So do you want git trees or not now? I spent quite some time to set up a tree for my last set of patches, but what got in was slightly different, so when I pulles I got a merge and duplicates in my tree and had to git-reset to a point before my patches. If you do apply from the list anyway I can avoid that overhead. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch 01/22] fix compile on 32 bit systems, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Remove XFS_BUF_SHUT() and friends, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: New XFS git tree on oss.sgi.com, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: New XFS git tree on oss.sgi.com, Niv Sardi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |