From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv4: Standardize prefixes for message
 logging
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:14:47 -0700
Message-ID: <1332191687.6525.15.camel@joe2Laptop>
References: <20120312.170558.584205292599435892.davem@davemloft.net>
	 <1331598952.13200.43.camel@joe2Laptop>
	 <1332190804.6525.12.camel@joe2Laptop>
	 <20120319.170349.957038489849471796.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120319.170349.957038489849471796.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 17:03 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:00:04 -0700
[]
> > Would you still take a similar IPv6: prefix
> > change for net-next or should I wait until
> > the next release cycle?
> Sure why not,
[]
> Instead, it really means "too late."

No worries, I'll set a good example instead.