From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: nico@fluxnic.net (Nicolas Pitre)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:52:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Pull request: removal of most instances of mach/memory.h
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1109262028310.2718@xanadu.home>
References: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1109130849590.20358@xanadu.home>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109201349400.12663@xanadu.home>
	<20110926131524.GJ22455@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109260952490.2718@xanadu.home>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109261023360.2718@xanadu.home>
	<20110926191055.GP22455@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109261514330.2718@xanadu.home>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109261606210.2718@xanadu.home>
	<20110926223839.GB23680@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109261901550.2718@xanadu.home>
	<20110926232943.GD23680@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1109262028310.2718@xanadu.home>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1109262047290.2718@xanadu.home>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Sep 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> 
> > A little more discipline and communication (such as asking me to drop
> > the duplicate commit _first_) would be nice.
> 
> Certainly.  Improving communication both ways might help.

One way this could be improved would be for your patch system to send 
notification emails with the submitter address explicit in the To: 
field.  Right now it contains linux-arm-patches at lists.arm.linux.org.uk 
only, therefore those emails don't get sorted with the best priority 
they could get.


Nicolas