[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190916070101.GE18977@kadam>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:01:01 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS:
Maintainer Entry Profile
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 05:44:39PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> One pet peeve I have is that people are pretty bad at indicating the
> intended target tree. I often ask for it in private mail but the
> practice doesn't seem to stick. I spend a ton of time guessing whether a
> patch is a fix for a new feature in the x+1 queue or a fix for the
> current release. It is not always obvious.
The Fixes tag doesn't help?
Of course, you've never asked me or anyone on kernel-newbies that
question. We don't normally know the answer either. I do always try to
figure it out for networking, but it's kind of a pain in the butt and I
mess up surpisingly often for how much effort I put into getting it
right.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists