[U-Boot] Application of patch submitted during the previous Merge Window

Graeme Russ
2011-09-23T10:17:23Z

Hi Stefano,

On 23/09/11 20:04, Stefano Babic wrote:
> On 09/23/2011 11:21 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:

> Maybe we have to start updating patchwork directly after sending our
> answers to the ML to maintain the tool synchron. I was used to update
> patchwork after answering several messages to the ML and, well, it is
> common to forget to update some patches to the new status. It take more
> time, but the only way that works with me is to update patchwork after
> each answer, and not at the end...

I must admit, as a sole developer/custodian, I really do not know how much
work it is to update Patchwork in sync with the ML

>> Well I have a few niggles with Patchwork:
>> - It failed to see one patch in one of my multi-patch series
>> - Even though I kept the 'in-reply-to' chain intact, it still has the
>> individual versions of my console patches (it should just update the
>> existing patch)
>> - I cannot even find phylib: remove a couple of redundant code lines
>> (submitted 06/09/11 by Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>)
>
> I cannot see this patch on the mailing list, too. I can see a patch with
> the same name submitted a day before at 05/09/11. And I can find it in
> patchwork:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/113414/

Ah, I see now - it has been accepted. Silly me :)

>>> Also any volunteers to help out. There are many areas where help
>>> could be needed.
>>>
>>> - We need a new network custodian.
>>>
>>> - We could need some "trivial patch monkeys" that pick up trivial
>>> patches (like cosmetic changes cleaning up coding style things etc.,
>>> documentation changes etc.) so I just can pull that stuff.
>>
>> Maybe the load can be spread here - maintainers can put these in designated
>> branches in their repositories. I know this will cause the odd conflict,
>> but we (the maintainers) could also periodically sync between each other.
>> Another alternative is to create a new repo that all the custodians have
>> access to...
>
> This makes things more complicated.....

Probably true. But we really need to collect these little patches somehow -
Wolfgang is just too busy and they fly right past him

Regards,

Graeme