From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99•com>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic•net>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm•linux.org.uk>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger•kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>,
Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@canonical•com>,
Jeff Ohlstein <johlstei@codeaurora•org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:55:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1287507316.10071.9.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010182227440.2764@xanadu.home>
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 22:47 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > I can say that I know for a fact that people don't read every patch, or
> > every email, or keep track of every single thread. I don't think it's
> > reasonable to expect people to do that. there's too many email, too many
> > threads, too many discussions etc ..
>
> I'm not saying that you should keep track of every threads. But you
> should at least pay attention to what thread is being discussed, simply
> by looking at the subject line. Any good MUA will let you sort emails
> and collapse them into thread view. And scoring those incoming emails
> with "arch/arm/mach-msm" for example is a quick way for you to be
> noticed when a patch might be changing something in your area. Tools
> are there for you.
AFAIK before this thread, I should get CC'd when you modify me tree..
Maybe I'll setup some tools _now_ ..
> > This discussion isn't really about that. It's not about people reading
> > every single patch, which we know they don't do. This is about conflicts
> > in -next.
>
> Glad to get back to the original issue.
>
> > These patches caused conflicts in -next .. What more could I have done
> > to prevent conflicts coming from another tree and patches that appear
> > not to effect me? Even if I read all the patches, and threads, it still
> > seems unreasonable to expect maintainers to predict conflicts not coming
> > from their own tree's.
>
> In this particular case, Stephen did fix the trivial merge conflict.
> Most probably Linus could have done the same. There is nothing you
> needed to do in that case. Or you could have waited until RMK's tree
> hits mainline, then you merge that, fixing the issue within that merge,
> before asking Linus to pull.
>
> And if the merge in linux-next turned out not to be that trivial, or you
> have new machine entries in your tree that failed to compile due to the
> missing fixup, well that's fine too because that's _exactly_ what the
> purpose of the linux-next tree is: finding issues like this before the
> real merge in Linus' tree. So in this case the system did work: the
> conflict was identified by the tool and you were notified.
>
> And the simplest solution to this is simply to merge your stuff into
> RMK's tree in this case, so the generic change affecting all ARM
> machines will cover yours as well. Incidentally that's what has been
> asked of you.
>
> See? Nothing to really get excited about.
Am I excited? Russell is the one getting excited .. I was the one trying
to correct the issues , so Linus doesn't have to deal with it.
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-19 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-17 23:35 linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-18 0:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-18 8:15 ` Russell King
2010-10-18 17:26 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 18:20 ` Russell King
2010-10-18 18:46 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 19:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-18 20:12 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 20:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-10-18 20:37 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 20:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-10-18 21:05 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 21:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-18 21:35 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 21:11 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-18 20:58 ` Russell King
2010-10-18 21:29 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 21:58 ` Russell King
2010-10-18 22:27 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 22:35 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-18 22:53 ` Joe Perches
2010-10-19 13:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-10-19 17:03 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-19 17:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-19 18:42 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-19 18:53 ` Russell King
2010-10-19 19:24 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-19 18:34 ` Russell King
2010-10-19 18:49 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 23:09 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 23:32 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-18 23:45 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-19 2:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-10-19 16:55 ` Daniel Walker [this message]
2010-10-18 20:19 ` Daniel Walker
2010-10-18 20:57 ` Nicolas Pitre
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-07-31 6:08 Stephen Rothwell
2011-01-31 2:14 Stephen Rothwell
2011-01-31 2:14 Stephen Rothwell
2011-02-02 18:29 ` David Brown
2011-02-02 19:43 ` Greg KH
2011-02-02 20:00 ` Russell King
2011-02-02 20:32 ` Greg KH
2011-02-02 20:44 ` Russell King
2011-02-02 21:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-02-02 22:46 ` David Brown
2011-02-02 22:59 ` David Brown
2011-02-03 0:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-02-04 17:17 ` Daniel Walker
2011-02-04 17:42 ` Russell King
2011-02-04 18:02 ` David Brown
2011-02-04 18:10 ` Daniel Walker
2011-02-04 19:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-02-04 20:38 ` David Brown
2010-05-04 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
2010-05-04 16:42 ` Daniel Walker
2010-05-04 21:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1287507316.10071.9.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com \
--to=dwalker@fifo99$(echo .)com \
--cc=jeremy.kerr@canonical$(echo .)com \
--cc=johlstei@codeaurora$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=nico@fluxnic$(echo .)net \
--cc=rmk@arm$(echo .)linux.org.uk \
--cc=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox