On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:24:23 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2018-04-15 at 16:43 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 13:36:51 -0300 > > Hernán Gonzalez <hernan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hernán Gonzalez <hernan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Please have a single patch (with move detection turned off) for this and the > > previous. > > > Allows easy review by showing us the code but doesn't lead to a stage in which > > two different versions will build and hence probably break bisectiblity. > > Moving both files in a single patch is fine but > move detection off is much harder to review. > Not in this one case. Here we want explicitly to review the code, not the move. The point is to put the whole driver code in front of people as part of the proposal to move it out of staging. If we leave move detection on then there is a barrier to review as only someone who has actually applied all the patches will be able to see what state the driver is in. Sure, side effect is we loose the check on whether it is a 'pure' move or not, but that is easy to check when I finally apply the patches. I haven't come up with a better way of reviewing a staging driver on the mailing lists in a fashion similar to how we would review a newly submitted driver. Jonathan > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
