On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 04:00:45PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Tom Rini wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 03:20:37PM -0400, Dan Malek wrote: > > >>No, send a whole patch that _does_ something. Let's see all of these > >>changes at once. By itself, this patch is useless and doesn't add any > >>features, it just wastes our time discussing it. > > > >A series of inter-dependant patches might be better, but I like small, > >easy to understand patches. > > you know, it's a good thing i'm severely bipolar. :-) somebody needs > to make a decision -- i'll go with whatever it is.
Ah. I assumed you were sending out one chunk at a time something you had 'done', sorry. To be clear, what I prefer is a series of patches that get something done. A single small cleanup like you posted is fine, but if you have it as part of a larger change, just include it in the series. 'Documentation/SubmittingPatches' is probably a good reference, subsituting linux-kernel with linuxppc-embedded :) -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
