Hi Petr, Seems it was misinterpreted, it was just a suggestion from our end if the patch can be taken as a full for G.8275.2 functionality. We are in the process of making the changes in small multiple patches so that they can be easily acceptable by the community. Thanks, Devasish
On Wed, 18 May 2022 at 21:32, Petr Machata <pe...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > Devasish Dey <devasish....@syncmonk.net> writes: > > > 1. We have invested time in development and have been verified by the > > team as a complete solution which is addressing the requirements of > > G.8275.2 > > It's good to know that you have taken time to make sure the changes > actually work. But you still need to present them in a way that is > possible to review and evaluate by the community. > > That means splitting the overall work into some number of topical > patchsets, contributing one at a time, working with the community until > it is acceptable, and then following up with the next patchset. > > This project broadly adheres to the same process as the Linux kernel > uses, so you can use the following as a guide: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html > > > Breaking the changes into small patches may lead to intermediate > > functionality breaks. So we strongly feel this should be taken as a > > single patch which addresses the complete G.8275.2 requirements. > > You have to make sure it doesn't. It should build cleanly and work after > every patch in the series. This is important for bisecting and > reverting. >
_______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
