Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote: > Mark Brown writes: > > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something > > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". > Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status > as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the > "no content free pings" response ... Which just boils down to a "what's going on with this" message. > > As I said in my > > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to > > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case > > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried > > somehow. > So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if > the patch is old enough that it probably got lost? > I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read > the canned response that way. No, I'm saying don't send pings at all. Resend patches if you think they've got lost, and as normal when you're sending a patch it should start off a new thread. The goal is to send something that can be directly acted on when it's seen rather than requring another round of mails. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote: > Mark Brown writes: > > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something > > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". > Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status > as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the > "no content free pings" response ... Which just boils down to a "what's going on with this" message. > > As I said in my > > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to > > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case > > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried > > somehow. > So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if > the patch is old enough that it probably got lost? > I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read > the canned response that way. No, I'm saying don't send pings at all. Resend patches if you think they've got lost, and as normal when you're sending a patch it should start off a new thread. The goal is to send something that can be directly acted on when it's seen rather than requring another round of mails. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
Mark Brown writes: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 02:43:08PM +, Harald Geyer wrote: > > > BTW, it took me a bit to figure out that by "content free ping" you are > > refering to the quoting of the patch. Maybe you can reword your canned > > response to make it easier to understand. > > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the "no content free pings" response ... > As I said in my > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried > somehow. So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if the patch is old enough that it probably got lost? I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read the canned response that way.
Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
Mark Brown writes: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 02:43:08PM +, Harald Geyer wrote: > > > BTW, it took me a bit to figure out that by "content free ping" you are > > refering to the quoting of the patch. Maybe you can reword your canned > > response to make it easier to understand. > > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the "no content free pings" response ... > As I said in my > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried > somehow. So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if the patch is old enough that it probably got lost? I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read the canned response that way.
Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 02:43:08PM +, Harald Geyer wrote: > BTW, it took me a bit to figure out that by "content free ping" you are > refering to the quoting of the patch. Maybe you can reword your canned > response to make it easier to understand. No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". As I said in my reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried somehow. This is unfortunately something that happens upstream, things fall through the cracks sometimes for various reasons (eg, if a new patch gets sent in the middle of a thread sometimes it'll get deleted along with the reset of the thread). signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 02:43:08PM +, Harald Geyer wrote: > BTW, it took me a bit to figure out that by "content free ping" you are > refering to the quoting of the patch. Maybe you can reword your canned > response to make it easier to understand. No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". As I said in my reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried somehow. This is unfortunately something that happens upstream, things fall through the cracks sometimes for various reasons (eg, if a new patch gets sent in the middle of a thread sometimes it'll get deleted along with the reset of the thread). signature.asc Description: PGP signature
