Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add NetCube Systems Austria name

[Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li>]

Am 2025-01-02 21:59, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> On 02/01/2025 19:48, Lukas Schmid wrote:
>> Am 2025-01-02 19:31, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
>>> On 02/01/2025 19:24, Lukas Schmid wrote:
>>>> Am 2025-01-02 18:57, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
>>>>> On 02/01/2025 18:49, Lukas Schmid wrote:
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Schmid <lukas.schmid@netcube.li>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>> 
>>>>> You did not read really the messages we gave you...
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1. Read what I wrote in my first reply for v1. I gave detailed
>>>>> instruction to avoid the exact mistake you now did.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2. Read again Andre's reply.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 3. Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads
>>>>> (unrelated or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox
>>>>> and
>>>>> might interfere with applying entire sets.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 4. Next version, with proper cover letter, is after 24h, so you 
>>>>> have
>>>>> some time to digest the feedback.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely apologize for the
>>>> mistakes
>>>> in my submission process.
>>>> 
>>>> I did read Andre's reply and your feedback on v1, but unfortunately, 
>>>> I
>>>> had already sent the v2 series as a reply before fully understanding
>>>> all
>>>> the recommendations. I realize now that this was a misstep and 
>>>> caused
>>>> confusion.
>>>> 
>>>> I will wait until tomorrow, around 20:00, to send the v3 series. I
>>>> will
>>>> make sure to include a proper cover letter and ensure that all the
>>>> feedback from v1 and v2 is addressed.
>>>> 
>>>> Regarding the v1 feedback, I thought I had incorporated all your
>>>> suggestions. However, after rereading it, I seem to have missed
>>>> something critical. Could you please point out what I might have
>>>> overlooked? I want to make sure I fully understand and correct it in
>>>> the
>>>> next iteration.
>>>> 
>>> Please read my full reply for v1 of this patch. How did you implement
>>> that feedback - long instruction?
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>> 
>> I assume by 'long instruction' you mean checking the devicetree using
>> 'make dtbs_check W=1'.
> 
> There was nothing like that. Again, we talk about this patch, not 
> other.
> You refer now to other patch.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Oh I see now. It's about the Acked-by. I have already added it to the
commit-message of my clone. The V3 will have those two included. I have
read the message from Andre, but unfortunately had already sent the new
patches before I got the mail. I have already applied the tags.

Best regards,
Lukas