On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 13:51 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 11:33 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 19:19 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > 2012/1/10 Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > *) Initial merge for the SRP target (ib_srpt) fabric module (bart) > > > > > > As far as I know the last time that patch was posted for review is > > > November 4 (http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi.target.devel/420). > > > The date of the ib_srpt commit is December 16 > > > (http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nab/target-pending.git;a=commitdiff;h=a42d985bd5b234da8b61347a78dc3057bf7bb94d). > > > The two patches aren't identical. That makes me wonder whether that > > > patch should have been reposted for review ? > > > > > > > Hi Bart, > > > > The changes since the Nov 4 RFC are listed in the patch commit log: > > > > ib_srpt: Make compilation with BUG=n proceed` > > ib_srpt: Use new target_core_fabric.h include > > ib_srpt: Check hex2bin() return code to silence build warning > > > > These are all very minor and did not warrant another full RFC posting. > > They might not warrant a full RFC reposting, but individually they > should have been posted to the list, so Bart is right. > Thanks for your input here, but the last two where reported to linux-next / target-devel and fixed weeks ago. The first one was from Bart himself. > As a maintainer, there shouldn't be a patch in your tree that hasn't > been over the mailing list once. This is for three reasons > > 1. Git is a great source control tool, bit it doesn't hugely > facilitate review. Even virtuoso git users find it easier to > read and reply to emailed patches for this purpose > 2. Not everyone in our community is a wholesale git user. For > them, email might be the only way they get to see a patch, so > using git alone lowers our pool of reviewers (and reviewers are > the species we most need to encourage) > 3. Enforcing the rule that everything is emailed first can save you > from the maintainers curse: the temptation to bung in that last > little "obvious" fix just before you send your tree to Linus > which later turns out to cause huge regressions and much > heartache. > > You don't have to endlessly repost patch series, just make sure that > small updates get posted for review and comment before they get applied. > Yes, yes and yes. :) --nab -- 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
