diff for duplicates of <20120414232124.1ffd7ac9@stein> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index dee6499..032b7cc 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@ On Apr 14 Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Stefan Richter > <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote: -> > Generally, "commit + push out" makes it undroppable. ?In case of -stable, +> > Generally, "commit + push out" makes it undroppable. In case of -stable, > > commit/ push out/ tag are close and virtually identical. > > > > After a change was pushed out, the choice narrows down to add a reverting > > change for a subsequent release or to rebase to a point before the -> > defective commit. ?The latter is not done to -stable, obviously. ?(3.3.2 +> > defective commit. The latter is not done to -stable, obviously. (3.3.2 > > is not being restarted from 3.3 if a regression from 3.3 to 3.3.1 was > > discovered.) > @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ fulfill. > >> the queue *before* the tag is made, doesn't it? If you find a patch in > >> the stable review queue causes problems, why don't you leave it there? > > -> > As Willy wrote, that's actually what is done sometimes. ?I didn't know +> > As Willy wrote, that's actually what is done sometimes. I didn't know > > that. > > Don't avoid the question. @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ nothing else. [...] > > if a defective change was not dropped but released, and now requires -> > a fix (e.g. revert) "today: ?There are now /two/ bugs: ?In the mainline +> > a fix (e.g. revert) "today: There are now /two/ bugs: In the mainline > > and in a stable kernel. > > What?! So, if an issue has been in the kernel for the last 10 years, diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 72d4d75..67ec9a6 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -17,20 +17,32 @@ "ref\020120414195559.3d5ab944@stein\0" "ref\0CAMP44s0ngzwkbQapTip=oW1b5m2uO5zCzbXHVqHXwT2+Wpgo_A@mail.gmail.com\0" "From\0Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>\0" - "Subject\0[ath9k-devel] [ 00/78] 3.3.2-stable review\0" + "Subject\0Re: [ 00/78] 3.3.2-stable review\0" "Date\0Sat, 14 Apr 2012 23:21:24 +0200\0" - "To\0ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org\0" + "To\0Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>\0" + "Cc\0Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>" + Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> + Sergio Correia <lists@uece.net> + linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org + stable@vger.kernel.org + torvalds@linux-foundation.org + akpm@linux-foundation.org + alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk + linux-wireless Mailing List <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org> + Sujith Manoharan <c_manoha@qca.qualcomm.com> + ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org <ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net> + " John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Apr 14 Felipe Contreras wrote:\n" "> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Stefan Richter\n" "> <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:\n" - "> > Generally, \"commit + push out\" makes it undroppable. ?In case of -stable,\n" + "> > Generally, \"commit + push out\" makes it undroppable. \302\240In case of -stable,\n" "> > commit/ push out/ tag are close and virtually identical.\n" "> >\n" "> > After a change was pushed out, the choice narrows down to add a reverting\n" "> > change for a subsequent release or to rebase to a point before the\n" - "> > defective commit. ?The latter is not done to -stable, obviously. ?(3.3.2\n" + "> > defective commit. \302\240The latter is not done to -stable, obviously. \302\240(3.3.2\n" "> > is not being restarted from 3.3 if a regression from 3.3 to 3.3.1 was\n" "> > discovered.)\n" "> \n" @@ -58,7 +70,7 @@ "> >> the queue *before* the tag is made, doesn't it? If you find a patch in\n" "> >> the stable review queue causes problems, why don't you leave it there?\n" "> >\n" - "> > As Willy wrote, that's actually what is done sometimes. ?I didn't know\n" + "> > As Willy wrote, that's actually what is done sometimes. \302\240I didn't know\n" "> > that.\n" "> \n" "> Don't avoid the question.\n" @@ -95,7 +107,7 @@ "\n" "[...]\n" "> > if a defective change was not dropped but released, and now requires\n" - "> > a fix (e.g. revert) \"today: ?There are now /two/ bugs: ?In the mainline\n" + "> > a fix (e.g. revert) \"today: \302\240There are now /two/ bugs: \302\240In the mainline\n" "> > and in a stable kernel.\n" "> \n" "> What?! So, if an issue has been in the kernel for the last 10 years,\n" @@ -148,4 +160,4 @@ "-=====-===-- -=-- -===-\n" http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -04a4873542242cf78cca7fac32b6a6bcf63f8b6b6dd0d2a9ddfbeff74d9f8c8a +c83cb662e4bfd057e3b9df3e966beabca88697c92966633e1f47268ff9caf8a3
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.