Re: [PATCH] powertop: update to 2.0+git

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

On Monday 16 July 2012 12:33:00 Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
> > On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >>> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches; it is nice to have
> >>> those to track the pending patches.
> >> 
> >> Isn't that field only used to put in "pending" and then backslap each
> >> other on doing such a good job?> 
> > Personally I find it incredibly useful to differentiate between
> > patches that should be going upstream and patches that are OE-specific
> > for various reasons.
> 
> I'm not debating the usefulness of the U-S field, I'm debating the
> usefulness of using 'Pending' as a catch-all. I can do:
> 
> for patch in *.patch ; do
> 	echo "Upstream-Status: Pending" >> $patch
> done
> 
> And it will get accepted, but is ultimately useless.

No, it is not. It signifies that the patch is considered appropriate by the 
submitter for upstreaming.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre