From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: asm-generic changes for 4.6 Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 16:17:01 +0100 Message-ID: <4835715.nQCP8sPCa9@wuerfel> References: <11845534.Q9psV3m4LA@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([217.72.192.75]:62945 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751884AbcCYPRI (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Mar 2016 11:17:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Thursday 24 March 2016 23:29:31 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > asm-generic changes for 4.6 > > Btw, can you add "[GIT PULL]" to the subject line for your pulls? Or a > "Please pull" in the body or similar. > > When I do pulls, my email filter looks for (surprise surprise) the > terms "git" and "pull". > > And this didn't trigger either of those. > > The normal git request-pull script has that "git" part, and some > people just add the "Please pull" to the email, and my filter will > pick that up too. But the easiest and preferred way for me to see pull > requests ends up being that "[GIT PULL]" in the subject line. For the > same reason I prefer "[PATCH x/y]" in the subject line for patches. > > Not getting caught by my filter sometimes means that a pull gets > delayed. Very seldom it might be overlooked entirely, but usually I do > catch it later on after the other pulls (like happened now). > Right. I realized my mistake the minute after sending the mail out, but decided against sending it again immediately, assuming that you'd either find it or I could resend the next day. Thanks for pulling it in! Arnd