From: David Miller on
From: "John W. Linville" <linville(a)tuxdriver.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:32:28 -0500

> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:25:40PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> From: "John W. Linville" <linville(a)tuxdriver.com>
>> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:19:54 -0500
>>
>> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:36:58AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> >> From: Johannes Berg <johannes(a)sipsolutions.net>
>> >> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:15:37 +0100
>> >>
>> >> > It was intentional -- that sdev doesn't even have an irq member, but
>> >> > nobody ever noticed because of the wrong ifdef.
>> >>
>> >> Ok, then this needs to be explained in the commit message.
>> >
>> > OK...mind if I just revert the current version and ask Michael to
>> > resubmit with an appropriate changelog entry?
>>
>> Have you pulled this tree into others already? Why not
>> just pop out the commit and fix it's commit message, then
>> reapply?
>>
>> Having the revert commit in there is really stupid just for this.
>
> I have it pulled into wireless-next-2.6 to fix a merge conflict (from
> a latter commit). It is also pulled into wireless-testing but that
> is obviously less of an issue.

Ok, forget this, I'll just pull it in as-is.

But we have to have a better system to handle cases where I
don't like a change you're asking me to pull in and I want
changes made to it.

If you want to push stuff into wireless-next-2.6, get it into
my tree first. That way we can tidy things up before it
propagates.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: John W. Linville on
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:25:40PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: "John W. Linville" <linville(a)tuxdriver.com>
> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:19:54 -0500
>
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:36:58AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Johannes Berg <johannes(a)sipsolutions.net>
> >> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:15:37 +0100
> >>
> >> > It was intentional -- that sdev doesn't even have an irq member, but
> >> > nobody ever noticed because of the wrong ifdef.
> >>
> >> Ok, then this needs to be explained in the commit message.
> >
> > OK...mind if I just revert the current version and ask Michael to
> > resubmit with an appropriate changelog entry?
>
> Have you pulled this tree into others already? Why not
> just pop out the commit and fix it's commit message, then
> reapply?
>
> Having the revert commit in there is really stupid just for this.

I have it pulled into wireless-next-2.6 to fix a merge conflict (from
a latter commit). It is also pulled into wireless-testing but that
is obviously less of an issue.

John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville(a)tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: John W. Linville on
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:35:03PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: "John W. Linville" <linville(a)tuxdriver.com>
> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:32:28 -0500
>
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:25:40PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: "John W. Linville" <linville(a)tuxdriver.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:19:54 -0500
> >>
> >> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:36:58AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> >> From: Johannes Berg <johannes(a)sipsolutions.net>
> >> >> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:15:37 +0100
> >> >>
> >> >> > It was intentional -- that sdev doesn't even have an irq member, but
> >> >> > nobody ever noticed because of the wrong ifdef.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ok, then this needs to be explained in the commit message.
> >> >
> >> > OK...mind if I just revert the current version and ask Michael to
> >> > resubmit with an appropriate changelog entry?
> >>
> >> Have you pulled this tree into others already? Why not
> >> just pop out the commit and fix it's commit message, then
> >> reapply?
> >>
> >> Having the revert commit in there is really stupid just for this.
> >
> > I have it pulled into wireless-next-2.6 to fix a merge conflict (from
> > a latter commit). It is also pulled into wireless-testing but that
> > is obviously less of an issue.
>
> Ok, forget this, I'll just pull it in as-is.

K, thx!

> But we have to have a better system to handle cases where I
> don't like a change you're asking me to pull in and I want
> changes made to it.
>
> If you want to push stuff into wireless-next-2.6, get it into
> my tree first. That way we can tidy things up before it
> propagates.

Yeah, I was trying to be proactive about the merge conflicts and
avoid the emails about the conflicts in -next. But I guess that
isn't a huge deal anyway, so I'll be a bit more cautious in the future.

Thanks!

John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville(a)tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/