On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Johan Hovold wrote: > >> > I think the better place is HID/input tree, since this patch depends >> > on the initial one which is not in my tree. >> > I'm going to merge Johan's whole patchset and this patch probably >> > depends Johan's work too. >> >> Dmitry has ACKed the input-patch and Bryan has applied that one and the >> leds-patches to his tree (of which the first one is a dependency of this >> patch). >> >> Jiri, are you saying that the gt683r-driver should go in through his >> tree as well, that is all three patches including the first that you >> have already applied? I just assumed your for-next branch was immutable, >> but perhaps I was mistaken. > > Well, for-next branch is a collection of all the topic branches I am > queuing for the following merge window. > > I am never really rebasing it, but I can definitely not include > 'for-3.17/hid-gt683r' topic branch in the pile I will be sending to Linus > (all the scheduled branches are getting merged into 'for-linus' only when > merge window open). So the only potential conflict between hid.git and > Bryan's tree would be in linux-next (and probably there will be none, git > can handle duplicate patches nicely). > > So once Bryan confirms he's queued it (please preserve my Signoff from my > tree), then I will just not include for-3.17/hid-gt683r branch in pull > request to Linus and all is fine. > I'm OK to merge Janne's first patch for HID GT683R through my tree with you guys' SOB. I'm also OK to merge this incremental patchset here. Please confirm it if I didn't misunderstand here. Also Janne or someone, can you post the original first patch to me or point me where is it? Thanks, -Bryan -- 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
