patchwork missing patches?

patchwork missing patches?

[Josh Boyer]

I'm trying to find some patches that went to the list recently in
patchwork and they seem to be missing.  Here are a few:

http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052196.html
http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052164.html
http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052129.html
http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052050.html

There might be more.  Maybe I'm just blind, but I can't find them at
all in patchwork.

josh

Re: patchwork missing patches?

[Olof Johansson]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 09:39:50AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> I'm trying to find some patches that went to the list recently in
> patchwork and they seem to be missing.  Here are a few:
> 
> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052196.html

I looked up the first one:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch&id=17004

> There might be more.  Maybe I'm just blind, but I can't find them at
> all in patchwork.

The above is marked "Awaiting Upstream", maybe that's filtering it out
from your default list?


-Olof

Re: patchwork missing patches?

[Paul Mackerras]

Josh Boyer writes:

> I'm trying to find some patches that went to the list recently in
> patchwork and they seem to be missing.  Here are a few:
> 
> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052196.html

That one was in "awaiting upstream" state since I put it in the
bundle, then realized it should probably go through your tree, and
didn't apply it.  I've put it back to "new" state now.

> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052164.html

I seem to recall putting that one in "changes requested" state, but
now I can't find it either.  Strange...

> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052129.html

Not sure where that one has gone.

> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052050.html

I have been deleting patches that go through other maintainers to try
to keep the number of patches down to a manageable level, and that
includes ibm_newemac patches, since they go through Jeff Garzik.
That's probably what happened to this one.  I'll leave ibm_newemac
patches alone if you promise to clean them up periodically. :)

Paul.

Re: patchwork missing patches?

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:00:00 +1100
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:

> Josh Boyer writes:
> 
> > I'm trying to find some patches that went to the list recently in
> > patchwork and they seem to be missing.  Here are a few:
> > 
> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052196.html
> 
> That one was in "awaiting upstream" state since I put it in the
> bundle, then realized it should probably go through your tree, and
> didn't apply it.  I've put it back to "new" state now.

Ok.  Not sure why I couldn't find it under the "All" state earlier.  I
see it now.

> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052164.html
> 
> I seem to recall putting that one in "changes requested" state, but
> now I can't find it either.  Strange...

"changes requested" is what I was expecting, but didn't see it.
Strange indeed.

> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052129.html
> 
> Not sure where that one has gone.

It's not overly important, since it was whitespace corrupted and I have
a fixed version anyway.  But it's still odd it's not on patchwork.

> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2008-February/052050.html
> 
> I have been deleting patches that go through other maintainers to try
> to keep the number of patches down to a manageable level, and that
> includes ibm_newemac patches, since they go through Jeff Garzik.
> That's probably what happened to this one.  I'll leave ibm_newemac
> patches alone if you promise to clean them up periodically. :)

Oh, I didn't realize you could actually outright delete them.  I tend
to look after ibm_newemac because it's mostly related to 4xx and I get
to bug BenH to do the jgarzik bugging because he said he wants to be
the maintainer.  I have no problems cleaning them up.

josh