Ezequiel, On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 04:29:15PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 01:37:33PM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 01:51:20PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > > The patches are based in Jason Cooper's mvebu/dt branch. > > > > It probably doesn't matter for this series (I haven't tried to apply it > > yet), but please base future work off of a mainline tag (eg v3.8-rc6). > > It makes merge conflicts easier to resolve. > > > > Feel free to test-merge against the mvebu/ branches and let me know of > > any conflicts. > > > > Ah, I see. > > I was mistakenly assuming you wanted against that branch; > I'll base the patches on mainline in the future.
Nope, the branches are organized that way to sanely merge in with all the other arm-soc code. While I make every effort to keep them stable (ie, not rebased), they may change at anytime if I need to fix things. tags are stable, and if all patches are based on tags, then merge conflicts follow a predictable pattern. Anything else devolves into chaos. > > Also, your patch series appears to be out of order, did you use git > > send-email once per file? > > I always send the cover letter manually. This time I did it after the patches. > I'm in the process of automating this in my workflow, > but feel free to make a suggestion. if format-patch is called properly (I know from experience how to call it improperly ;-) ), you can just do $ git send-email ... /path/to/patches/*.patch and it'll get the order correct. It will also ask for confirmation before sending each email. Dry-run sending a series just to yourself lets you see how it will appear once it goes out to the list. hth, Jason. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
