Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Nov 2013 13:10:01 -0800 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] regulator updates for v3.13-rc1 | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > Mark Brown (4): > Merge remote-tracking branch 'regulator/fix/arizona' into regulator-linus > Merge remote-tracking branch 'regulator/fix/fixed' into regulator-linus > Merge remote-tracking branch 'regulator/fix/gpio' into regulator-linus > Merge remote-tracking branch 'regulator/fix/pfuze100' into regulator-linus
Btw, I suspect you could/should have just used an "octopus merge" to merge these kinds of small independent branches in one go. Just list all the branches you want to merge for one single "git merge", and you're done.
I don't necessarily recommend doing that in general, but octopus merges are actually quite nice for this kind of situation in that it avoids having excessive empty merge commits. Now we end up having your four merges, and then my one merge on top: so we have five merges for four actual fixes. Octopus merges can end up making the history more readable by avoiding that kind of somewhat excessive merge activity that you otherwise easily get from having lots of small topic branches.
But it's up to you. I like seeing topic branches, and that part is absolutely a good git habit to get into. Octopus merges then have the upside that they then avoid having lots of pointless small merge commits to tie them all together, but they can make it slightly more challenging to figure out what went wrong if problems happen. So in this case, one option might have been to merge the three independent driver fixes with one single octopus merge, and then merge the core fix separately as a normal merge.
Whatever. Not a big deal, I just thought I'd mention it if you perhaps didn't realize that git happily merges multiple branches at once..
Linus
| |