[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: If you want me to quit I will quit
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 07:51:32AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 14:00:44 +0300 Adrian Bunk <> wrote:
> > Why do other people get over 100 checkpatch fixes into the tree at once
> > or Linus applies patches directly bypassing the maintainers (like the
> > one you sent just before [3], which I've also already sent before [4])
> > but my patches bitrot forever?
> If I am not cc'ed on a patch and have to resort to plucking it off the
> mailing list it ends up being significantly more work and more error-prone
> for me to process it.
> I used to merge your patches but then you chose to stop ccing me on them so
> I stopped applying them. The increased hassle just isn't worth it for some
> random make-foo-static patch. I do try to keep an eye out for more
> significant changes but hey, stuff happens.
> You chose to disrupt the workflow and now you're here complaining and blaming
> others for the consequences of your own action.

Why didn't you tell me an explicit Cc is important for you?

I'll resend my pending batch with a Cc to you.

That only leaves the question why bugfixes are directly applied by Linux
when they come from other people, but not when they come from me. Is
there also a Cc required? But my patch for the x86 userspace headers
fuckup was Cc'ed to Linus (and I can't send it to -stable before it is
in Linus' tree).

Is the correct path for bug fixes to go through the maintainer or to go
directly through Linus? And in the latter case, what was wrong with my



"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-26 17:27    [W:0.079 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site