[ewg] Re: [ofa-general] ANNOUNCE ofed backports for 2.6.22 kernel bits

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

> Quoting Arthur Jones <arthur.jones at qlogic.com>:
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] ANNOUNCE ofed backports for 2.6.22 kernel bits
> 
> hi michael, ...
> 
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 07:16:46PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > [...]
> > But, for these cases where the code actually needs to be modified,
> > applying a patch seems like the least evil way to do it.
> > Alternatives seem to be much worse.
> 
> what is it about patches that are less evil
> than changesets?  can you list some of the
> advantages?

changesets *do not exist* in git - git tracks content.

I compare "multiple directories with patches" with the "bush of branches".
With bush of branches:
git pull broken, git archive broken, git tag broken, git reset broken.
It looks like the list can be continued.

Yes, we can start building our own tools on top of git to do this,
but I'd rather not.

-- 
MST