[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] dim: Update docs for update-branches

[Jani Nikula]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2016, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:14:29AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Dec 2016, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 11:53:07PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 08 Dec 2016, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> >> > It's been years since drm-intel had only one maintainer, and the
>> >> > primary use-case for dim ub was only to sync between machines. Update
>> >> > the docs to reflect this, to avoid misleading committers. Also update
>> >> > the maintainer-tools branch, which is something Paulo's script also
>> >> > does.
>> >> >
>> >> > Motivated because Paulo typed an actualize.sh script which does
>> >> > exactly what dim ub is meant to do.
>> >> >
>> >> > v2: Also update quickstart guide.
>> >> >
>> >> > v3: And spelling fixes.
>> >> >
>> >> > Acked-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com>
>> >> > ---
>> >> >  dim     |  3 +++
>> >> >  dim.rst | 11 ++++++-----
>> >> >  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/dim b/dim
>> >> > index e0551ace54e4..3e82de96b4ab 100755
>> >> > --- a/dim
>> >> > +++ b/dim
>> >> > @@ -1293,6 +1293,9 @@ function dim_update_branches
>> >> >  	dim_checkout drm-intel-next
>> >> >  	$DRY git reset --hard $DIM_DRM_INTEL_REMOTE/drm-intel-next
>> >> >  
>> >> > +	cd $DIM_PREFIX/maintainer-tools
>> >> > +	git pull --rebase
>> >> > +
>> >> 
>> >> Ooops?
>> >
>> > From the commit message: "Also update the maintainer-tools branch, which
>> > is something Paulo's script also does." This way dim update-branches
>> > updates everything, and I think that's good, I liked that idea from
>> > Paulo's script a lot.
>> 
>> Oh. Didn't expect that in a patch with "update docs" as the title.
>
> Yeah, subject is misleading.
>
>> I often run dim with the changes I'm developing, using branches other
>> than maintainer-tools, so I'm not entirely thrilled.
>
> Should I check whether it's still on the maintainer-tools branch and only
> update if that's the case? That should cover all use-cases I hope ...

That would work fine, thanks.

BR,
Jani.

> -Daniel

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center