* new scsi driver etiquette
@ 2004-01-09 17:44 Dave Boutcher
2004-01-09 17:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Dave Boutcher @ 2004-01-09 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-scsi
After the recent discussions on people bypassing the linux-scsi list
with their scsi code, I would not dream of such a faux pas. I'm about
to submit a bunch of code for your collective review.
If I have a couple of big new driver files (e.g. 3500+ lines), what is
the most appropriate format for review? Just include them inline
in a mailing to the list? I'm not quite ready to send them as a
formal patch.
Thanks,
Dave B
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: new scsi driver etiquette
2004-01-09 17:44 new scsi driver etiquette Dave Boutcher
@ 2004-01-09 17:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-01-09 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Boutcher; +Cc: linux-scsi
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 11:44:44AM -0600, Dave Boutcher wrote:
>
> After the recent discussions on people bypassing the linux-scsi list
> with their scsi code, I would not dream of such a faux pas. I'm about
> to submit a bunch of code for your collective review.
>
> If I have a couple of big new driver files (e.g. 3500+ lines), what is
> the most appropriate format for review? Just include them inline
> in a mailing to the list? I'm not quite ready to send them as a
> formal patch.
url for a tarball is fine with me. actual submission should of course
be a patch
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-01-09 17:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-01-09 17:44 new scsi driver etiquette Dave Boutcher
2004-01-09 17:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).