In message fa686aa40710131739u31ab087axe554ab04fbb6b2c5@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
Really? It's perfectly reasonable for custodians to have multiple branches and to request for you to pull from a specific one. This
It is definitely perfectly reasonable to have multiple branches (otherwise we might go back to CVS - shudder).
But if you want to make life easy for me, then always use the same one (ideally simply master) to request the poull from.
THis allows me to set up all the custodian repos as remote tracking branches in one remotes.<group>. This allows me to get a quick overview. If you use several branches for oulling, it's pretty likely that I miss the correct branch name in your pull request and do the wrong thing.
becomes especially true with the adoption of the merge window process. For instance, I have two branches on the 5xxx tree; one for bugfixes to be merged immediately and another for stuff queued up for the next window.
You could merge the bugfixes branch into master immediately and the other one when the next window opens?
Besides, when someone uses git-request-pull (like Michal did) it's a pretty trivial cut/paste to use git-pull to bring it into your branch.
I don't pull immediately. I first fetch it into a local tracking branch so I can review it more easily before merging it.
It's not like it causes you extra work. :-)
That's exactly the problem: it *does* cause more work.
Maybe my usage of git is sub-optimal, I'm just learning. But it seems to work pretty efficiet to me... If you have better ideas I'd appreciate all tips and tricks...
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk