From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from ffm.saftware.de ([83.141.3.46]:47862 "EHLO ffm.saftware.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754835Ab1EHW0Q (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 May 2011 18:26:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4DC71884.6040400@linuxtv.org> Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 00:26:12 +0200 From: Andreas Oberritter MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Kerrison CC: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Antti Palosaari , linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] DVB-T2 API updates, documentation and accompanying small fixes References: <4DC417DA.5030107@redhat.com> <1304869873-9974-1-git-send-email-steve@stevekerrison.com> <4DC6BF28.8070006@redhat.com> <1304875061.2920.13.camel@ares> In-Reply-To: <1304875061.2920.13.camel@ares> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: Sender: Mauro Carvalho Chehab On 05/08/2011 07:17 PM, Steve Kerrison wrote: > Quick question about resubmission: > > Do I resubmit all 6 (5 after fold) patches as v2, or can I ignore what > is currently patch 5 as it is uncommented? I don't know enough about > patchwork to know whether changing the PATCH x/n will break things or > what the proper procedure is. (RTFM with appropriate URL is an > appropriate response to this, of course :) ) I think that previously submitted, now obsolete patches need to be marked as superseded by hand in patchwork in any case. Regards, Andreas