On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:38:44 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:11 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > James Bottomley wrote: > > > The initial bsg submit went via the block git tree ... which I believe > > > you have in -mm. We only started taking the updates via the scsi tree > > > > Seven hours before you posted this, in > > <20070807001429.f8cb3b22.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew already > > noted it was not in -mm. > > > > A trivial examination of the broken-out mm patches backs up the absence > > of Jens' block tree, too. > > > > So let's put this myth / bad assumption to rest, shall we? > > Sorry ... I just assumed from the fact that it had been in the block git > tree for six months that it was also in -mm. bsg was never in the #for-akpm branch of git-block. So I assume that Jens had it in some other branch and for some reason never pulled it across into #for-akpm. It was most reasonable of you to expect that bsg had received a decent run in -mm. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
