On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 02:40:41PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Andy Shevchenko > > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Ognjen Galić <smclt30p@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> You definitely need to send a new revision with all comments > >> addressed. So far you didn't responce to them which I recognize as > >> total agreement that they have to be addressed. > > > > I asked for not sending new versions before I have a chance to look at > > the current one in detail, but enough time has passed after the last > > one, so I agree. Sending a new version at this point won't hurt. :-) > > Thanks, Rafael, for clarification, that's exactly what I kept in mind > when proposing a new version (I'm concerned as well of frequency of > patch series to be not so high). > Well guys hold on tight, another patch revision is incoming: #11. Oh, and by the way, happy new year! > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ ibm-acpi-devel mailing list ibm-acpi-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel
