From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: pull request Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 06:45:39 +0100 Message-ID: <4993B783.7060207@trash.net> References: <1234364616-19974-1-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <4992E97C.5050508@trash.net> <4993AF8E.7040200@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:40383 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750783AbZBLFpp (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:45:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Thursday 2009-02-12 06:11, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>>>> How do these interact with the Jamal's pending changes? >>>> I think it should be fine as I am changing just the periphery here. >>>> If it merges without git-pull stopping, after you applied his, >>>> it's probably ok :) >>>> >>> OTOH, I suggest you could do it like Linus [states in his Git >>> presentation at Google], that is, merging whatever happens to be >>> first in the mailbox. I think that the statistical distribution >>> is equal anyway. >> Thats why I'm asking. He was first so it would only be fair to >> apply his patches first. Your's are more though so might be more >> work to fix up. The easiest way might be if you apply Jamal's >> patches and I simply pull everything from you. You seem to have >> more remarks about these patches than me anyways :) >> > Maybe I suggested too much :p > But yeah, why not. Great, thanks.