Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Any feedback for -next?
Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-next,dev.linux.lists.ksummit |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
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: > > Any other ideas? > > I'm new to this area, so please forgive what might be a silly > question: would it make sense for maintainers' -next trees to keep > a stable git history? > > Some maintainer trees are already stable and append-only, which > gives linux-next users/testers stable commits to point to, instead > of ephemeral commits that can disappear later due to history > rewrites. > > 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. -- Steve