[PULL] 1.12 fix queue
airlied at gmail.com
Thu Jan 12 02:00:00 PST 2012
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Keith Packard <keithp at keithp.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 01:02:44 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston <jeremyhu at apple.com> wrote:
>> Another (cleaner) option is to just branch xserver-1.12-branch from
>> ed8f3c4bd17bddf1369d050ea8e63b9451d887ce (the commit before ajax's
>> changes landed) and let master chug along towards 1.13.
> We've not done this in the past, rather we've let people hold on to
> their patches after the end of the merge window. I do like the notion of
> merging not-for-1.12 patches somewhere rather than let them live
> unmerged for months.
> I can easily do that. Now, the only question is one of names. I'm not
> sure I like changing where the release is done; keeping it on master
> makes things straightforward (at least for me, and perhaps for
> others?). The pending changes could be in a 'next' branch. Each time I
> merged patches to master I could either:
> a) merge master->next
> b) rebase next on top of master
> a) will result in a ton of merge commits on next, but would keep the
> temporal ordering of patches 'correct'. b) will make 'next' look a lot
> cleaner, but lose ordering information.
>> If these do get reverted rather than doing a branch, ajax, please
>> squash the two patches I just sent to the list into your tree.
> I propose to reset master back before the ABI change and then
> cherry-pick any non-ABI fixes that Adam sent, then re-push master at
> that point. This will make things pretty, although will cause a mild
> amount of grief for people tracking the server tree.
Don't reset, the damage is done, accept it, embrace it, revert it.
More information about the xorg-devel