[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMpxmJVzYGpLVkxiye-n-Vv+KWU=65acZNQwEHaW3A9NwgixRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:22:32 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
GregKH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 00/14] eeprom: at24: driver rework and
at24cs/at24mac support
2016-06-08 10:45 GMT+02:00 Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>:
>
>> sorry for that. I always resend after a week without response - just
>> as suggested in Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
>
> Wow, do I really have to tell you these things?
>
> * It doesn't suggest to do that. It suggests to wait *a minimum* a week if
> you yourself considered doing that.
>
> * A ping is more lightweight than resending 14 patches
>
> * You *know* the lag in the i2c patch review. How should a reference to
> SubmittingPatches help the situation?
>
> Needless to say, I could have reviewed a patch now instead of uncovering
> wrong/sloppy readings of SubmittingPatches which I don't want to spread :(
>
Ok, ping instead of resend, you don't forget patches, I got it the
last time already and apologized.
Best regards,
Bartosz Golaszewski
Powered by blists - more mailing lists