From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@prisktech.co.nz (Tony Prisk)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 07:32:28 +1300
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] arm: vt8500: Add support for Wondermedia WM8750/WM8850
In-Reply-To: <201301101021.44238.arnd@arndb.de>
References: <1356650452-16559-1-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz>
 <201301092127.05804.arnd@arndb.de> <1357783407.28830.2.camel@gitbox>
 <201301101021.44238.arnd@arndb.de>
Message-ID: <1357842748.6075.4.camel@gitbox>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 10:21 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel


All makes sense now - thanks.

Regards
Tony P