On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:45 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > If you had conventions on naming this is the first I've heard of > them. I know Paul asked about the [POWERPC] to powerpc: change on > list.
Well, they weren't official, but others seem to have picked them up, no big deal but heh, here now you know about them :-) > I do so as well. As stated above, if there are naming conventions > that are desired I'm happy to conform but just need to know what they > are. Well, my aim is mostly consistency. If you don't like what I want, I'm happy to discuss it, but I'd like basically to keep consistency in the naming conventions. In some cases though, my comment also refers to the subject being a tad too vague to my taste. I know there isn't a strict definition of what is good enough or not and we definitely don't want a 3 lines novel there, but in the case of the .dts file update, it would have been useful to highlight that fact for example. > The limit is based on trust. I submitted all the other cleanup > patches to remove PPC_MERGE. I think I can handle such a patch going > via my tree. I would have still preferred if we had discussed it before hand... Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
