From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:21:43 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] arm: vt8500: Add support for Wondermedia WM8750/WM8850 In-Reply-To: <1357783407.28830.2.camel@gitbox> References: <1356650452-16559-1-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz> <201301092127.05804.arnd@arndb.de> <1357783407.28830.2.camel@gitbox> Message-ID: <201301101021.44238.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thursday 10 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 21:27 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? > > This is what I thought - and the reason I haven't sent a pull-request > for the patch's - I haven't had any Ack's :) > Sorry, I think I misunderstood the question then. I meant that if you received an Acked-by statement, it should be part of the changeset comment by the time you send a pull request. There is also the rule that patches need to be reviewed on the mailing list before you submit them for inclusion. Like all rules, this can be bent a little for patches that are obvious correct bug fixes, especially when you are the platform maintainer. What you can do here is send the patches out to the mailing list without any additional Acks and send the pull request as the [PATCH 0/X] mail. We can then look at the patches if necessary or just pull in the branch straight away. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753426Ab3AJKWA (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:22:00 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:57666 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751639Ab3AJKV7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:21:59 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Tony Prisk Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] arm: vt8500: Add support for Wondermedia WM8750/WM8850 Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:21:43 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.7.0-7-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Olof Johansson , vt8500-wm8505-linux-kernel@googlegroups.com, arm@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <1356650452-16559-1-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz> <201301092127.05804.arnd@arndb.de> <1357783407.28830.2.camel@gitbox> In-Reply-To: <1357783407.28830.2.camel@gitbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201301101021.44238.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:SFJawzUV0n8F/wEzho0BkBpCzqnKDjKIfBdk/GHoKxe zLZkPHnDNj6T6fpv/MZUqUtxO6mG2Ety8s5RbqWU0rF6/7wYEg rOxTAJg8xPdIQDnuuWdHRrYs/biyrtdFux1Z5q8yfMo6v21tur v278+DVMpj6AAOq3+ttw15klMLfNCJmLYCOpLJVITqq1Q1h3Na w13ZxXyQAK1Grkm+yagupA9AZmIcH15thEZAhDoD/JkRTmT0Uv mVEqsqZRfXgLVGrWJZNm7evInTesw8gQl0+ZrzctVQsVw1G/Nx S0HfZDVvDC8nmjOBl43uS1a/2k/0mayEwQKOh8fJGq4lHAH+Vy 8kuizU15U579wAiv+HBc= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 10 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 21:27 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? > > This is what I thought - and the reason I haven't sent a pull-request > for the patch's - I haven't had any Ack's :) > Sorry, I think I misunderstood the question then. I meant that if you received an Acked-by statement, it should be part of the changeset comment by the time you send a pull request. There is also the rule that patches need to be reviewed on the mailing list before you submit them for inclusion. Like all rules, this can be bent a little for patches that are obvious correct bug fixes, especially when you are the platform maintainer. What you can do here is send the patches out to the mailing list without any additional Acks and send the pull request as the [PATCH 0/X] mail. We can then look at the patches if necessary or just pull in the branch straight away. Arnd