Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 9 Dec 2006 14:55:45 +0100 | From | "Jesper Juhl" <> | Subject | Re: why are some of my patches being credited to other "authors"? |
| |
On 09/12/06, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@mindspring.com> wrote: > On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Tim Schmielau wrote: > > > i wrote: > > > > but given that i'm trying to follow the kernel guidelines and keep > > > each submission as a logically-related chunk, in many cases, i > > > have to wait for one patch to be applied before i can submit the > > > next one. and, at the moment, there's no way of knowing what's > > > going on. > > > > Well, you can send out a patch series: > > [patch 01/02] Prepare foo for blah > > [patch 02/02] Apply blah to foo > > Ideally you would finish the patch description for patch 02 with something > > like > > > > --- > > This patch depends on [patch 01/02] Prepare foo for blah > > ... snip ... > > wait a minute. that's not what i've understood all this time as the > rationale for a multi-part patch -- to show dependency. certainly, > that's not what you read in "SubmittingPatches": > > "If one patch depends on another patch in order for a change to be > complete, that is OK. Simply note "this patch depends on patch X" in > your patch description." > > that doesn't say anything about using the multi-part notation. are > you sure about this? > I've done this several times. It's quite a common way of doing it.
-- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |