Re: [GIT PULL] XFS update for 3.4-rc1

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> xfs/master contains scalability improvements for dquots, log grant code
> cleanups, plus bugfixes and cleanups large and small.

Shortlog and diffstat?

> Unfortunately the stuff in:  git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs master
>
> Conflicts with the stuff in:  git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs for-linus

There's still nothng in 'for-linus'.

> I've resolved the conflict here:  git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs for-linus-merged

I actually prefer to merge things myself to see what is up, especially
since everybody else writes horrible merge messages (but also because
I simply want to know what the conflicts are). I appreciate more
complex pull requests that *also* have a "pre-merged" branch just in
case (I tend to use that for verification if there was anything even
remotely questionable going on), but I really do not generally want
pre-merging.

I'm used to resolving conflicts. I'm so used to it, in fact, that
there have been cases where I did it right despite not really knowing
the code and the maintainer did it wrong, just because I know what to
look for.

> I would like to figure out how to
> 1) send important bugfixes upstream after rc1, and
> 2) not hold up development commits to xfs/master, while
> 3) avoiding conflicts like this.

Avoiding conflicts isn't that important. Getting too many of them
implies that there is something odd going on. But a few conflicts due
to upstream bugfixes are basically "normal". Judging by the merge I
see, there wasn't anything complicated going on.

                           Linus