On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:04:21 +1000, Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net
wrote:
I thought it was you as CC but that's not always the case, in fact I noticed
that some patches sent for general review get applied directly to master.
So in preparing a patchset with several patches, some of
Tiago Vignatti wrote:
Keith Packard wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:04:21 +1000, Peter Hutterer
peter.hutte...@who-t.net wrote:
I thought it was you as CC but that's not always the case, in fact I
noticed
that some patches sent for general review get applied directly to
master.
So in
Thanks for the long answer. I've summed this up on the wiki
http://www.x.org/wiki/XServer
the main changes/additions:
- if you want a patch directly merged to master, state so in the email.
- pull requests for single patches are fine
- pull requests should have a Reviewed-by line for each patch
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 01:41 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:48:45PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:30:53AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
I don't think that's necessarily true in areas that aren't EXA;
certainly, no-one else has complained, and
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:18:45 +0200, Tiago Vignatti tiago.vigna...@nokia.com
wrote:
Yeah, I lost my implementation of the X server with the separate thread for
input stuffs. Would be nice to have it for future references or whatever. So
let's please backup annarchy!
Ok, I'll go ask our (free)
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 20:58 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:14:47AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 23:55 -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
So, this is just a quick status check on the new development
model. I'd like to hear from anyone with an opinion
On Nov 18, 2009, at 10:58 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:14:47AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
It's not
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 20:58 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:14:47AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
It's not working too well for EXA yet; a number of acked patches haven't
been applied yet.
I'd suggest
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 23:01 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 20:58 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:14:47AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
It's not working too well for EXA yet; a number of
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:20:48PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 23:01 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Are there at least any indications that we're getting any tangible
benefits from this increased
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:30:53AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:20:48PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 23:01 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Are there at least any indications
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:48:45PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:30:53AM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
I don't think that's necessarily true in areas that aren't EXA;
certainly, no-one else has complained, and the patch flow from both
regular and one-off contributors
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 00:30 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:20:48PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 23:01 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38:01AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Are there at least any indications that we're
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:53 +1100, Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org wrote:
I don't think that's necessarily true in areas that aren't EXA;
certainly, no-one else has complained, and the patch flow from both
regular and one-off contributors seems to be very similar to what it was
before the
So, this is just a quick status check on the new development
model. I'd like to hear from anyone with an opinion on how it's
working for them.
Obviously we're seeing a bit more delay in getting patches into
master, but I think that's been mostly positive, with a bit more
discussion happening on
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:55:27PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
Has anyone had a patch go missing (neither applied nor replied to)?
ajax was setting up patchwork at some stage, so if there are any which
have gone missing (and I think some of Jamey's have), then that should
be caught by
On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 18:50 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:55:27PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
Has anyone had a patch go missing (neither applied nor replied to)?
ajax was setting up patchwork at some stage, so if there are any which
have gone missing (and I think
17 matches
Mail list logo
