On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 01:56:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 01:06:52PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:40:56AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > maintainers (and not assume lack of ack after 24 hours means acceptance), or > > > > > > > > Wrong, 72 to 96 hours. Sunday to Wednesday/Thursday. > > > > > > Not that this is really material (the argument is pretty much the same even had > > > you waited 3 days), but you are already wrong about the 'Sunday' part, because > > > you posted it to lkml on *Monday* 13:27 GMT: > > > > > > Message-ID: <20110509132738.GB16919@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Mon, 9 May 2011 09:27:52 -0400 > > > > Sigh. So you're only looking at the _second_ posting of them, not the first. > > > > Here's the message, minus the patch. > > > > | Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 19:24:07 +0100 > > | From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > | To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Stultz <johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx>, > > | "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > | Subject: i8253 clocksource consolidation > > | Message-ID: <20110508182407.GN27807@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > | > > | Ralf, John, Ingo, hpa, > > I did not get that mail, at all. It's not in my spam mbox either. > > This pretty much explains why you assumed us informed and should explain to you > why i was surprised by your way of handling the patch :-) I never got a bounce either. Here's my outgoing MTA log lines for that message: 2011-05-08 19:24:10 1QJ8eH-0004Rc-GR <= linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx H=n2100.arm.linux.org.uk [2002:4e20:1eda:1:214:fdff:fe10:4f86] I=[2002:4e20:1eda:1:a00:2bff:fe95:1d7b]:25 P=esmtpsa X=TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256 A=cram:n2100.arm.linux.org.uk S=16326 id=20110508182407.GN27807@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx T="i8253 clocksource consolidation" for ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx hpa@xxxxxxxxx mingo@xxxxxxxxxx 2011-05-08 19:24:54 1QJ8eH-0004Rc-GR => mingo@xxxxxxxxxx R=verp_dnslookup T=verp_smtp S=16866 H=mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28] C="250 2.0.0 p48IOnv1008509 Message accepted for delivery" So, mx1.redhat.com accepted it... In theory, whoever has access to mx1.redhat.com's logs should be able to trace what happened to the message... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
