Subject: Re: linux-next: i2c tree build failure

From: Jean Delvare <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:15:46 +0200

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:59:05 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:16:47 +0200 Jean Delvare <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > I am also surprised that I would have to tell you. What is the purpose
> > of the NEXT_BASE tag if you do not check for dependencies automatically?
> 
> I use the tag to choose the base when I import the quilt series into git.
> So far I have not needed to automate the ordering of the imports.
> 
> > Anyway, if you say git can deal with duplicate patches OK, then I think
> > I'll simply re-add the patch on my end. But I do not have a strong
> > opinion on this either, so if you prefer clean dependencies and
> > ordering without duplicate patches, it is just as easy for me to leave
> > the redundant patch out and restore the NEXT_BASE tag.
> 
> I prefer less dependencies (so you could put the patch back in), however,
> that means if Greg changes the patch, then we will have two slightly
> different versions to merge.  I can cope with that as well.

I've made sure my patch has the same name as Greg's, to make it easier
for you to spot duplicates.

> Just readd the patch :-)

OK, done. Hopefully the next merge window is coming soon now anyway, and
then the trouble with this specific patch will be solved.

-- 
Jean Delvare