Hello, Thomas. On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:45:24AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > And we have very well worked out mechanisms regarding cross tree > changes, i.e. providing minimal trees to pull for other maintainers.
If you look at the review branches, they're actually structured that way so that the timer part can be pulled separately. If the maintainer wants to do that, sure. If the maintainer thinks routing through another tree is fine, that's okay too. Subsystem boundaries are all good and great but it's not some absolute barrier which can't be crossed at any cost. > > If you're upset about the style of the ping, I apologize. I'll try > > to be more sensitive when pinging you. > > It's not about me. You are trying to play the system. Thomas, I wasn't trying to get it through behind your back. You have been notified clearly multiple times and have ample opportunities to object and suggest different ways if you don't like whatever is going on. I probably should have written "if the maintainer doesn't object, I think it would be easier to route these through wq/for-3.7 as it will be the only user for now, blah blah blah" instead and maybe I misjudged the character of the changes or the subsystem. That said, I think you're inferring too much. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
