From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: xirc2ps_cs bugfix Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20100813185623.GC5853@comet.dominikbrodowski.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Linus Torvalds , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Komuro To: Dominik Brodowski Return-path: Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:49293 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932077Ab0HMXtI (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:49:08 -0400 Received: by pwi4 with SMTP id 4so683736pwi.19 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:49:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100813185623.GC5853@comet.dominikbrodowski.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > could you apply the attached bugfix for PCMCIA, please? Alternatively, > please pull from > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brodo/pcmcia-2.6.git master > > where this one patch is located. What do you prefer, actually, if it is just > one patch I want to push to you? Doesn't really matter. These days, my workflow is so git-centric that a simple "git pull" is a tiny simpler just because it's what I do day in and day out, and doesn't involve exporting a patch and applying it - but the difference is really so small that it matters not at all. And applying the patch as a patch avoids a sily merge for a trivial change. So it really can go both ways. I'll take the patch this time, because I happened to be in my "gather up patches" mode (which in turn is mostly because your subject said "PATCH" rather than "GIT PULL" - I had ignored the email while in my "git pull" phase). Which just goes to show how little I care, and how small details make me do one over the other. So I think you should just base it on how convenient it is for you. But if you have even just two patches, I probably prefer a "git pull". But again, it's not a big deal. Linus