On Fri, 20 May 2011, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > is it intentional that you are leaving the hole in the numbering here? > > > > I don't think there would be any issue with re-numbering 7-10, would it? > > Well, the first time I tried to renumber those classes (to keep them > alphabetically sorted), I've been told not to do it. That's why I let > the hole in this case. > There won't be any issue in renumbering those classes (and we could sort them). > Maybe I can just send a new patch on top of this to sort them. OK. Well, I don't really care personally much, I was just wondering why leaving it unnecessarily sparse. I have applied the whole series now, thanks. > PS: and thank you very much for applying so quickly the last patches I > sent. I am preparing the tree for merge window push, so I rather have everything sorted out in the upcoming day or two. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
