Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Any feedback for -next?

On 8/12/26 10:14, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 10:10:17AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 8/12/26 08:59, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 04:42:21 -0700
>>>> Breno Leitao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 05:54:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>>> Would getting rid of these ephemeral commits make linux-next easier
>>>>> to work with?
> 
>>>> This has come up at the Maintainers Summit in the past. I believe it is
>>>> even in the article I posted earlier in another thread.
> 
>>>>      https://lwn.net/Articles/1050027/
> 
>>>> We are even discussing issues about this in that other thread as well:
> 
>>>>     https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> 
>>>> I try to keep my linux-next branch clean, but I do rebase to add tags. I do
>>>> on occasion remove commits if they prove to be totally broken. That's rare
>>>> but I rather have that then having to push something to Linus where a bunch
>>>> of commits are simply reverted.
> 
>>> +1
> 
>>> FWIW, I have always reserved the right to rebase in order to remove,
>>> move around, reword and otherwise fix-up commits and do so often.  To
>>> that end my 'next' branches are not, have ever been, nor do I intend
>>> them to ever be, stable.
> 
>> Same here.
> 
> I do it as a last resort, but its better to avoid having bug+fix things
> hitting upstream, i.e. trying to help with upstream bisectability.
> 

That, but mostly adding tags.

Guenter