On Friday, March 22, 2013 05:21:19 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Friday, March 22, 2013 07:50:54 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > >> Hmm... I always thought fixups are way easy to review (and i still > >> believe that's > >> true) as they just contain what got changed and so people don't have to review > >> whole patch again. > > > > They won't have to if you write in the preamble what the differences from > > previous versions are. > > You didn't get me.. How will the reviewer check if author has done what he > is saying in preamble and he hasn't broken anything new? Well, if the submitter wants to cheat, she/he certainly can this way, but what's the benefit, honestly? If the reviewer actually notices that there are more differences than the submitter admits to, the consequences may be quite unpleasant for the submitter (like the rejection of any future patches, for example). And mistakes are possible anyway (and the more patches you deal with, the greater the chances of making a mistake are). Thanks. Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
