From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: ARM SoC <arm@kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 19:19:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201305071919.53353.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwMXmJ9V+3o62ELm-0NT1DaUCTvidmAhJSXzQcTMfJygA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday 07 May 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > I used a new script to create the pull requests this time, hope
> > I got it right now.
>
> So you seem to have blasted this series out with that automated
> script, so they all got sent basically at the same timestamp, and they
> are in the wrong order in my mailbox because email isn't that ordered.
Yep, I'm very sorry about that. The old script I used had been a bit
fragile so I stopped using it for the last few merge windows
but tried something simpler this time. I had the sequence numbers
in the script but forgot to actually write them out in the subject.
> Of course, when there aren't any dependencies between pull requests,
> and the ordering doesn't matter, this isn't an issue. And *most* of
> the time you either have sent out emails by hand (and there's been
> that human delay and they arrived in the right order) or I've just
> been lucky.
I think it's the first time I made /this/ mistake, they were always
numbered in the past, and usually also had distinct time stamps.
> Quite frankly, I'm not going to bother guessing after the first one I
> took was clearly not the right one and gave the wrong diffstat etc, so
> they are all thrown down the toilet.
>
> Nothing pulled.
Yes, of course. It was an obvious mistake and I would have rejected
it the same way coming from my downstream maintainers. Sorry about
bothering you with this and your lenghty reply. I hope you don't
mind the contents, and I'll follow up with the same pull requests
again, using sequence numbers.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-07 16:02 [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc platform updates for 3.10, part 2 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc platform updates for 3.10, part 3 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc device tree changes, part 2 Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc: late cleanups Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 16:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: arm-soc: late Exynos multiplatform changes Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:02 ` [GIT PULL] ARM: Third batch of arm-soc changes for 3.10 Linus Torvalds
2013-05-07 17:19 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2013-05-07 17:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-07 17:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-07 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
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=201305071919.53353.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arm@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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