Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the arm tree

From: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 13:56:14 +0200

* Russell King - ARM Linux <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 01:06:52PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Russell King - ARM Linux <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:40:56AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >    maintainers (and not assume lack of ack after 24 hours means acceptance), or 
> > > 
> > > Wrong, 72 to 96 hours.  Sunday to Wednesday/Thursday.
> > 
> > Not that this is really material (the argument is pretty much the same even had 
> > you waited 3 days), but you are already wrong about the 'Sunday' part, because 
> > you posted it to lkml on *Monday* 13:27 GMT:
> > 
> >         Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
> >         Mon, 9 May 2011 09:27:52 -0400
> 
> Sigh.  So you're only looking at the _second_ posting of them, not the first.
>
> Here's the message, minus the patch.
> 
> | Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 19:24:07 +0100
> | From: Russell King - ARM Linux <[email-masked]>
> | To: Ralf Baechle <[email-masked]>, John Stultz <[email-masked]>,
> |         "H. Peter Anvin" <[email-masked]>, Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
> | Subject: i8253 clocksource consolidation
> | Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
> | 
> | Ralf, John, Ingo, hpa,

I did not get that mail, at all. It's not in my spam mbox either.

This pretty much explains why you assumed us informed and should explain to you 
why i was surprised by your way of handling the patch :-)

Thanks,

	Ingo