From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 19:19:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201305071919.53353.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwMXmJ9V+3o62ELm-0NT1DaUCTvidmAhJSXzQcTMfJygA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday 07 May 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > I used a new script to create the pull requests this time, hope
> > I got it right now.
>
> So you seem to have blasted this series out with that automated
> script, so they all got sent basically at the same timestamp, and they
> are in the wrong order in my mailbox because email isn't that ordered.
Yep, I'm very sorry about that. The old script I used had been a bit
fragile so I stopped using it for the last few merge windows
but tried something simpler this time. I had the sequence numbers
in the script but forgot to actually write them out in the subject.
> Of course, when there aren't any dependencies between pull requests,
> and the ordering doesn't matter, this isn't an issue. And *most* of
> the time you either have sent out emails by hand (and there's been
> that human delay and they arrived in the right order) or I've just
> been lucky.
I think it's the first time I made /this/ mistake, they were always
numbered in the past, and usually also had distinct time stamps.
> Quite frankly, I'm not going to bother guessing after the first one I
> took was clearly not the right one and gave the wrong diffstat etc, so
> they are all thrown down the toilet.
>
> Nothing pulled.
Yes, of course. It was an obvious mistake and I would have rejected
it the same way coming from my downstream maintainers. Sorry about
bothering you with this and your lenghty reply. I hope you don't
mind the contents, and I'll follow up with the same pull requests
again, using sequence numbers.
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: ARM SoC <arm@kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 19:19:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201305071919.53353.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwMXmJ9V+3o62ELm-0NT1DaUCTvidmAhJSXzQcTMfJygA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday 07 May 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > I used a new script to create the pull requests this time, hope
> > I got it right now.
>
> So you seem to have blasted this series out with that automated
> script, so they all got sent basically at the same timestamp, and they
> are in the wrong order in my mailbox because email isn't that ordered.
Yep, I'm very sorry about that. The old script I used had been a bit
fragile so I stopped using it for the last few merge windows
but tried something simpler this time. I had the sequence numbers
in the script but forgot to actually write them out in the subject.
> Of course, when there aren't any dependencies between pull requests,
> and the ordering doesn't matter, this isn't an issue. And *most* of
> the time you either have sent out emails by hand (and there's been
> that human delay and they arrived in the right order) or I've just
> been lucky.
I think it's the first time I made /this/ mistake, they were always
numbered in the past, and usually also had distinct time stamps.
> Quite frankly, I'm not going to bother guessing after the first one I
> took was clearly not the right one and gave the wrong diffstat etc, so
> they are all thrown down the toilet.
>
> Nothing pulled.
Yes, of course. It was an obvious mistake and I would have rejected
it the same way coming from my downstream maintainers. Sorry about
bothering you with this and your lenghty reply. I hope you don't
mind the contents, and I'll follow up with the same pull requests
again, using sequence numbers.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-07 16:02 [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc platform updates for 3.10, part 2 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc platform updates for 3.10, part 3 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc device tree changes, part 2 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc: late cleanups Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc: late Exynos multiplatform changes Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10 Linus Torvalds
2013-05-07 17:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-05-07 17:19 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2013-05-07 17:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-07 17:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-07 17:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-05-07 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201305071919.53353.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.