On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:32:59PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:25:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 04:44:12PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:20:03PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > > > > I think it's time to ask now :) > > > > If I receive "Tested-by" or "Acked-by" responses, do I need to send > > > > out a patch adding them, or should I rely on the maintainer taking the > > > > patch to the tree? > > > > The first option reduces the amount of work done by the maintainer, > > > > while the second one reduces the traffic in the list. > > > > Sorry, I couldn't find the answer in the manuals. > > > > > > It's up to the maintainer, so it varies. The best thing to do is to ask > > > the maintainer what they'd prefer. > > > > > > From my experience, Catalin is usually happy to add tags, so I suspect > > > he'd be happy to do so for this patch (assuming he's happy to pick it > > > up). I'll leave it for him to say either way. > > > > I usually cherry-pick tags that I see in reply to the *latest* version > > of the patch (I have a rudimentary script to do this). > > > > I noticed that there was an ack on v1 form Marc Z that's missing in v2. > > I believe Marc's reply [1] was to v3 [2], it's just that the version was > missing form the subject, and discussions continued on v2 in the mean > time.
OK, thanks for clarification. I thought the one with most replies was the latest ;). > > Maybe it no longer applies, I can't tell, but I usually expect > > subsequent versions of a patch to include all the previously given acks > > (of course, if they still apply, sometimes a patch rewrite means > > dropping those tags). > > I guess the simplest thing to do is for Alexander to send a v4 with the > tags accumulated, assuming James's Tested-by is applicable to v3 with > the boot/Makefile hunk removed. James? Even better. -- Catalin
