From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030838Ab2CNNp1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:45:27 -0400 Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:48337 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964984Ab2CNNpZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:45:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:45:20 -0400 From: "Ted Ts'o" To: Joe Perches Cc: Andrew Morton , Andy Whitcroft , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Suggest pr_ over printk(KERN_ Message-ID: <20120314134520.GA26524@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Ts'o , Joe Perches , Andrew Morton , Andy Whitcroft , LKML References: <20120314003157.GA15379@thunk.org> <1331686026.24613.6.camel@joe2Laptop> <20120314010701.GB15379@thunk.org> <1331687831.27389.2.camel@joe2Laptop> <20120314021938.GD15379@thunk.org> <1331692311.27389.27.camel@joe2Laptop> <20120314024104.GE15379@thunk.org> <1331694074.27389.42.camel@joe2Laptop> <20120314123429.GG15379@thunk.org> <1331730336.27389.70.camel@joe2Laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1331730336.27389.70.camel@joe2Laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on test.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 This includes updating status messages for patches that aren't obviously not applicable, or superceded, but rather something that I might get to look at later.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