Hi Kalle, On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Hi Kalle, >> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> Sure, I am starting that way. I checked in patchwork and I do not see >>>> any checkpatch related patch pending (except staging, which Greg will >>>> handle). I think you must have cleared all of them. >>> >>> They are in deferred state. The search functionality in patchwork is not >>> that intuitive and they are not easy to find so here's a direct link: >>> >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/?state=10&order=date >> >> I'm currently going through that list and producing a bundle of >> "applyable" patches. > > Nice. Thanks, I figured that checking the deferred list on patchwork at some point would be a good plan. After a release seemed like a good time to do it. >> My criteria is: >> 1. The change is sane. >> 2. It's either obviously correct, I can review it, or someone else has >> reviewed or acked it. >> 3. No changes other than rebasing and fixing commit messages are >> required to apply it. > > BTW, 'git am -s -3' is the best way to apply a patch. The three way > merge is awesome (if the submitter has sent the patch correctly). > >> Some of these patches need work on their commit messages, some are >> complicated enough that I feel I should be providing review notes so >> someone else can double check my review, and all of them should be >> rebased and compile tested. Also, some are controversial, so I'll be >> segregating them from the main set. >> >> How would you like me to communicate this list to you? I'm happy to >> provide branches you can pull from or I could just post updated >> versions to the list and give reviewed-by tags to those that don't >> need more work. >> >> Every patch will get an email on linux-wireless regardless. > > I guess posting the patches to linux-wireless is the easiest for > everyone? I have a script which automatically takes patches from > patchwork so that's very easy for me. But remember to use Signed-off-by > instead of Reviewed-by as you are resending the patches. If they end up being exactly identical to the original, I'll just add reviewed-bys to the original patches, otherwise I'll do exactly that. > Thanks you, your help here is very much appreciated. No problem! -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
