>> Do any contributors get into the mood to take another look at software
>> updates
>> from my selection of change possibilities in a more constructive way?
>>
>> Do you need any additional development resources?
>
> One last time: either post per-driver patches with all the cleanups for a
>
> One last time: either post per-driver patches with all the cleanups for a
> driver
> in a single patch,
I preferred to offer source code adjustments according to specific
transformation
patterns mostly for each software module separately (also in small patch
series).
> or a per-directory
On 02/02/18 10:55, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> ??? I did that: either one patch per directory with the same type of change,
>> or one patch per driver combining all the changes for that driver.
>
> Do any contributors get into the mood to take another look at software updates
> from my selection
> ??? I did that: either one patch per directory with the same type of change,
> or one patch per driver combining all the changes for that driver.
Do any contributors get into the mood to take another look at software updates
from my selection of change possibilities in a more constructive way?
> ??? I did that: either one patch per directory with the same type of change,
> or one patch per driver combining all the changes for that driver.
Are you going to answer any of my remaining questions in a more constructive
way?
Regards,
Markus
> ??? I did that: either one patch per directory with the same type of change,
> or one patch per driver combining all the changes for that driver.
Would you like to answer my still remaining questions in any more
constructive ways?
Regards,
Markus
but will reject the others, not just this driver but all of them
that are currently pending in our patchwork
(https://patchwork.linuxtv.org).
I find it very surprising that you rejected 146 useful update suggestions
so easily.
Feel free to repost, but only if you organize
> Yes, and you were told not to do it
I have got an other impression.
> like that again.
I continued with the presentation of suggestions from my selection
of change possibilities.
It seems that there are very different expectations for the
preferred patch granularity.
Can it happen again
On 10/30/2017 11:40 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> Feel free to repost, but only if you organize the patch as either fixing
> the same type of
> issue for a whole subdirectory (media/usb, media/pci, etc)
>>>
>>> Just for the record, while this may work for media, it won't work for all
Feel free to repost, but only if you organize the patch as either fixing
the same type of
issue for a whole subdirectory (media/usb, media/pci, etc)
>>
>> Just for the record, while this may work for media, it won't work for all
>> subsystems. One will quickly get a complaint that
On 10/30/2017 10:47 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>
>>> While we do not mind cleanup patches, the way you post them (one fix per
>>> file)
>>
>> I find it safer in this way while I was browsing through the landscape of
>> Linux
>> software
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > While we do not mind cleanup patches, the way you post them (one fix per
> > file)
>
> I find it safer in this way while I was browsing through the landscape of
> Linux
> software components.
>
>
> > is really annoying and takes us too much
> While we do not mind cleanup patches, the way you post them (one fix per file)
I find it safer in this way while I was browsing through the landscape of Linux
software components.
> is really annoying and takes us too much time to review.
It is just the case that there are so many remaining
13 matches
Mail list logo
