On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 04:06:08PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Yes, that is what confused my, sorry, since that commit and the ones > following are new commits but unchanged patches. As a suggestion, in addition to trying to count the number of commits that are new, or with the same patch id's, etc., is to provide the diff stats between the last version of the branch that landed in linux-next before the merge window opened, and the branch head that was requested for Linus to pull? This will get tripped up by those poeple who send multiple pull requests which are subsets of the branch that is tracked by linux-next (for example, to arrange the order of merging to minimize conflicts), so like all things, it's not perfect, but it might be useful additional indicator, at least in the early days of the merge window. Also, if you could report the commit id of the branch head before the merge window opened, then other people (including Linus) can do their own investigation and draw their own conclusions. Cheers, - Ted P.S. If there was some way this could be automated so that a 'bot sends out a report for every single pull request, then it minimizes the "J'accuse!" aspect, since the report is being done for all pull requests, and everyone knows that robots makes mistakes. :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
