Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: mfd: Patch management? | From | SF Markus Elfring <> | Date | Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:15:48 +0100 |
| |
>> I imagine that acceptance for these changes could be influenced >> also by review comments from other contributors. > > Influenced yes, but I will also need to review them.
Yes. - This is the usual process.
> You can't 'go around' me, if that's what you're thinking.
I do not think this. - I hope somehow that additional review comments (by other contributors) could make the handling of shown update candidates more promising.
>> How are the chances that further update suggestions will be integrated >> just because I sent them as small patch series in the threaded way? >> >> Examples: >> * tps65910: Adjustments for four function implementations >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/16/313 >> >> * abx500-core: Adjustments for eight function implementations >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/16/186 > > In order to not make my life difficult,
There are more options to make it a bit easier, aren't there?
> I've kindly requested that you gather all of your MFD patches
Or the remaining ones …?
> and send them as one single set.
Do you still insist to get these seven update steps in a bigger patch series despite of their threaded structure?
> Is there a good reason why you're not willing to do so?
I am trying to find out if a few formal details are really hindering progress on the clarification of affected implementation details.
I assume that additional hints could occur until I might rebase mentioned change combinations on another recent commit.
Regards, Markus
| |