On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 19:59 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:50:51PM +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 19:35 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > With trees like this that don't coordinate with their fixes > > > branch > > > there > > > are frequently multiple conflicts introduced so I generally > > > report > > > things file by file without even looking at the new ones. > > Sorry for the trouble. But how do you suggest that we "coordinate > > our > > fixes branch"? Merge fixes into the main tree? > > That'd be easiest for me! It's not of necessity a problem if the > conflicts are easy enough to resolve if you just let things get > merged > in -next, it's just more an observation that that's a thing that > happens > and that this is how I cope with it. Stephen may do things a bit > differently. Cool, I'll discuss this with Kalle and make sure I note these potential conflicts early enough so everyone is aware when they're coming. Thanks for taking over while Stephen is away! I really appreciate it, since linux-next is a very important part of our process. :) -- Luca. -- 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
