Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: Fix recursive Kconfig dependency

Sedat Dilek
2010-12-20T14:46:05Z

On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Peter Hüwe <PeterHuewe@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Freitag 17 Dezember 2010, 12:30:15 schrieb Sedat Dilek:
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Peter Hüwe <PeterHuewe@gmx.de> wrote:
>> > Am Mittwoch 15 Dezember 2010, 21:51:04 schrieb Randy Dunlap:
>> >> > Hi, another patch was posted before:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.platform.x86.devel/970/ma
>> >> > tch =acpi_wmi
>> >> >Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
>> >
>> > Yeah, you're right - but as Sedat's patch is perfect (and fixes both) -
>> > so for Sedats's patch:
>> > Acked-by: Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Peter
>>
>> [ CC John Linville ]
>>
>> It's a bit disappointing to see my fix is still not in
>> platform-drivers-x86/linux-next [1] (even it's only fixing "warnings",
>> 9 days past).
>> linux-next tree is for me a very high dynamic SCM tree, I am doing
>> mostly daily builds, at weekend I am testing/pulling other trees
>> before they go into Monday's linux-next.
>> As far as I have fun with "my process"... I will continue.
>
>
>
> Added Stephen Rothwell on CC, maybe he can apply it directly to linux-next ;)
>
> Peter
>

I do not think this will happen for a "as-warning-classified" patch.
As far as I understood from a previous asking to accept a patch
through Stephen, he answered me that he is expecting that patches for
sub-trees shall be pushed by the sub-maintainer(s).
This is surely the optimal way.

There is a nice, informative interview with Stephen on topic of
linux-next [1] (working together with submaintainers etc.).

Unfortunately, it will sometimes happen that more than one people will
notice or send a patch to the same issue.
So, yeah a bit waste of time someone could think.
Thus, it is always good to check the MLs first :-).

But which MLs?
It's a pity people don't use linux-next ML for l-n releated stuff.
As a consequence, I subscribed a few hours ago to linux-next ML [2]
and will post primarily there (LKML should IMHO not be the 1st place
for such issues, but a CC is OK).

The subjects of Emails should be very clear on what type of issue.
For example, breakage(s) shoul be clearly expressed.
Also, I miss often against WTF version of linux-next ppl send patches.
Hey, hello, each l-n version has a localversion-next file, didn't see :-)?
A good subject:
"Re: linux-next: Tree for December 20 (BROKEN iwlwifi)" or
"linux-next: next-20101220 (BROKEN iwlwifi)"

That a GIT tree is compile-able is a (maybe *the*) first step to QA,
but QA is a big playground.

Hmm, I have some ideas in my big suitcase...
The wiki [1] needs partly a refresh...
An IRC-channel #linux-next would be fine...
Lemme re-think and write them down.

- Sedat -

P.S.: Personally, I have seen some patches from Randy and others which
were still not applied.

[1] http://video.linux.com/video/1048
[2] http://linux.f-seidel.de/linux-next/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Linux-next.ShortSummary