From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: rebase of lblnet tree
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 23:09:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1571746.n7UVkKkBI4@sifl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130711100117.8b042a1a2a494bb9ee0003fd@canb.auug.org.au>
On Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:01:17 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
Hi Stephen,
I know you already emailed me privately about my @hp.com email address, but
for the sake of everyone else on the list, my @hp.com address no longer works,
it hasn't for some time now. Please check my entry in the MAINTAINERS file
for my correct contact information (this email address). That said, I
established this current email address to avoid problems when changing
employers so hopefully this confusion won't happen again in the future.
> Why have you just rebased the lblnet tree
> (git://git.infradead.org/users/pcmoore/lblnet-2.6_next#master)? You have
> just invalidated your testing and made it likely that Linus will blast
> you if you ask him to pull your tree. Your whole tree was already based
> after v3.10 (i.e. released or rebased after the merge window opened), so
> why move it again?
[NOTE: I get the impression that the above is a "form letter" email, but just
in case ...]
When I added two additional patches to the labeled networking tree today, I
rebased the tree to verify that there were no merge conflicts and that
everything worked as expected on a booted system. I also occasionally rebase
the tree when there are pending patches and I'm not adding anything new for
the same reason: I believe that testing changes against the latest upstream
code is a Good Thing. If there is a patch with my sign-off in a tree I am
responsible for, I do my best to make sure it builds, boots, and passes some
basic sanity tests. I can't say I'm perfect, but I do try to not push crap
upwards.
Also, just to be clear, the labeled networking tree usually goes into Linus'
tree via the netdev or security tree (and then it hits the security tree
usually via the SELinux tree). I can't ever think of a time when I asked
Linus' to pull a tree of mine directly.
If this approach doesn't work for you, please let me know and preferably
suggest an alternative.
-Paul
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-11 3:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-11 0:01 linux-next: rebase of lblnet tree Stephen Rothwell
2013-07-11 3:09 ` Paul Moore [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1571746.n7UVkKkBI4@sifl \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox