[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612090813080.13873@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 08:16:37 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To: Tim Schmielau <tim@...sik3.uni-rostock.de>
cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: why are some of my patches being credited to other "authors"?
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> i wrote:
> > but given that i'm trying to follow the kernel guidelines and keep
> > each submission as a logically-related chunk, in many cases, i
> > have to wait for one patch to be applied before i can submit the
> > next one. and, at the moment, there's no way of knowing what's
> > going on.
>
> Well, you can send out a patch series:
> [patch 01/02] Prepare foo for blah
> [patch 02/02] Apply blah to foo
> Ideally you would finish the patch description for patch 02 with something
> like
>
> ---
> This patch depends on [patch 01/02] Prepare foo for blah
... snip ...
wait a minute. that's not what i've understood all this time as the
rationale for a multi-part patch -- to show dependency. certainly,
that's not what you read in "SubmittingPatches":
"If one patch depends on another patch in order for a change to be
complete, that is OK. Simply note "this patch depends on patch X" in
your patch description."
that doesn't say anything about using the multi-part notation. are
you sure about this?
rday
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists