From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B12DDDDE3 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:51:41 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: Please pull from 'for-2.6.28' branch From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Kumar Gala In-Reply-To: <392E3825-8E5D-46B0-84CA-24A701BEDF96@kernel.crashing.org> References: <1224547898.7654.210.camel@pasglop> <392E3825-8E5D-46B0-84CA-24A701BEDF96@kernel.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:51:34 +1100 Message-Id: <1224561094.7654.229.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:45 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > If you had conventions on naming this is the first I've heard of > them. I know Paul asked about the [POWERPC] to powerpc: change on > list. Well, they weren't official, but others seem to have picked them up, no big deal but heh, here now you know about them :-) > I do so as well. As stated above, if there are naming conventions > that are desired I'm happy to conform but just need to know what they > are. Well, my aim is mostly consistency. If you don't like what I want, I'm happy to discuss it, but I'd like basically to keep consistency in the naming conventions. In some cases though, my comment also refers to the subject being a tad too vague to my taste. I know there isn't a strict definition of what is good enough or not and we definitely don't want a 3 lines novel there, but in the case of the .dts file update, it would have been useful to highlight that fact for example. > The limit is based on trust. I submitted all the other cleanup > patches to remove PPC_MERGE. I think I can handle such a patch going > via my tree. I would have still preferred if we had discussed it before hand... Cheers, Ben.