From: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Suggest pr_<level> over printk(KERN_<LEVEL>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:45:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120314134520.GA26524@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1331730336.27389.70.camel@joe2Laptop>
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 06:05:36AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Patchwork queues are pretty useless when patches entered
> do not have their status updated for long periods.
>
> The patch I sent in August 2011 shows "new" rather than
> have an appropriate status.
>
> If you actually use patchwork, though it seems you don't,
> I think you should just mark every patch that's new as
> rejected and start over.
I use it, but not in the way you think I should be using it. Your not
getting to your will on other kernel developers is what this thread is
all all about, ultimately.
I don't get to work on ext4 full time, and so every minute I put on it
has to not a be a waste of time. This includes updating status
messages for patches that aren't obviously not applicable, or
superceded, but rather something that I might get to look at later.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-14 13:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20120302025554.GA13493@joana>
[not found] ` <20120301.221643.881299898523907213.davem@davemloft.net>
[not found] ` <20120301.222316.1877216960521396397.davem@davemloft.net>
[not found] ` <20120301.222604.1508242694024394849.davem@davemloft.net>
[not found] ` <1330661602.1939.13.camel@joe2Laptop>
2012-03-02 5:35 ` [PATCH] checkpatch: Add --strict tests for braces, comments and casts Joe Perches
2012-03-02 5:54 ` [PATCH] checkpatch: Add --strict test for strings split across multiple lines Joe Perches
2012-03-13 6:23 ` [PATCH] checkpatch: Suggest pr_<level> over printk(KERN_<LEVEL> Joe Perches
2012-03-13 12:05 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-13 21:55 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-13 22:01 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-13 22:03 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-14 0:31 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-14 0:47 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-14 1:07 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-14 1:17 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-14 2:19 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-14 2:31 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-14 2:41 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-14 3:01 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-14 12:34 ` Ted Ts'o
2012-03-14 13:05 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-14 13:45 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2012-03-14 14:06 ` Joe Perches
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=20120314134520.GA26524@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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