lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: unneeded merge in the security tree
Date
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> - I do think that we might want a "--no-signatures" for the specific
> case of merging signed tags without actually taking the signature
> (because it's a "upstream" repo). The "--ff-only" thing is *too*
> strict. Sometimes you really do want to merge in new code, disallowing
> it entirely is tough.

I agree that "--ff-only" thing is too strict and sometimes you would
want to allow back-merges, but when you do allow such a back-merge,
is there a reason you want it to be --no-signatures merge? When a
subtree maintainer decides to merge a stable release point from you
with a good reason, I do not see anything wrong in recording that
the resulting commit _did_ merge what you released with a signature.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-12 23:41    [W:0.102 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site