On Don, 2012-07-12 at 15:00 -0700, Connor Behan wrote: > On 11/07/12 08:13 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 16:44 -0700, Connor Behan wrote: > >> On 06/07/12 03:52 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > >>> On Don, 2012-07-05 at 17:51 -0700, Connor Behan wrote: > >>>> For real this time. This allows the r128 driver to continue having 2D > >>> That this patch is for the r128 driver should be mentioned on the > >>> subject line (even if it was submitted to the xorg-driver-ati list :), > >>> e.g. as '[PATCH xf86-video-r128] ...' > >>> > >>> OTOH it doesn't need to be mentioned in the Git commit log, which is > >>> everything between the Subject: line and the '---' line. You can include > >>> additional information for the patch submission between the latter and > >>> the actual patch. > >> I just uploaded a patch to the bug tracker which gets rid of the > >> warnings and uses better conventions for the subject line and commit > >> summary. Should I send it to this list or xorg-driver-ati? > > I think the latter would be better, but either is fine. > > > > BTW, extra points for stripping the unrelated PLL and other > > whitespace-only changes from the patch. :) Otherwise it looks pretty > > good at a quick glance. > > > The PLL stuff was to fix debug mode so I just made it a separate patch > -- they apply in either order.
Cool. I probably won't get around to applying the patches before next week, maybe someone else beats me to it. > I'm embarrassing myself trying to send the main patch xorg-driver-ati. > The list tells me that the message is too long even if I regenerate it > with "git format-patch --attach". No worries, I approved it. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
