Re: [PATCH 00/14] pwm: Patches I consider ready for the next merge window

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2419 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 07:19:29AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2021, Thierry Reding wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 11:28:38AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > this is the set of patches that are open on the list for some time.
> > > Lee suggested to resend them.
> > > 
> > > @Thierry: I'm unsure what is the best way to nag. Is it really
> > > resending? Or does this just result mostly in overhead because the
> > > patches are still open in patchwork and it adds copies to your mailbox?
> > > (Another downside is that taking the patches from this thread results in
> > > recording a newer Author Date compared to picking up the originals.)
> > 
> > I use patchwork extensively for tracking, so merely resending patches so
> > that they float to the top of my inbox isn't useful in itself. Patches
> > do, by the way, float to the top of my inbox when you just reply to them
> > (e.g. by pinging). Resending a particular series is fine because it's
> > then easy to mark the old version as "superseded". Sending a collection
> > of patch such as this is a bit more annoying because now the duplicates
> > are spread about a bit more in patchwork, so it's a bit more work to get
> > patchwork cleaned up. But it's not that bad, so no harm done.
> > 
> > Usually when I look at patchwork I will look at the A/F/R/T column and
> > the more flags I see there, the more likely I will be to go and apply
> > it. Anything else I will go and look at myself and comment and/or apply
> > or sometimes wait for someone else to review.
> > 
> > Perhaps a better way to nag me would be to delegate patches that you've
> > reviewed or think are ready to me, which would make them stand out more
> > among the others.
> 
> It's not Uwe's fault, it's mine.
> 
> Since some of Uwe's patches had been left unreviewed for several
> weeks, I asked him to collect up all of his dangling patches and
> submit this resend for *me* to review.

Like I said, it's not a big deal. And I'm also aware that this is misery
of my own making, so no worries.

> As someone who does not use Patchwork, I find this to be the simplest
> and cleanest method of patch collation.  Going by your almost
> immediate reply, I guess it had a nice desired side-effect. :)

Indeed, it achieved the desired effect, so can't argue about its
effectiveness. =)

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]