On 07/23/2014 12:49 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 08:56:10AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> > Revert since the commit message is incorrect and the original author refuses >> > to fix/maintain it because "it's in the kernel already". > How can someone "fix" a commit message that is already in the tree? You > can't. The code part is correct, so why introduce the issue back? (I'm not trying to be aggressive, I just think that I misunderstand how this part of the process works exactly). I thought we can always edit -next trees? Why do we have to maintain fast forward on them? What happens, if for example you take a patch that causes build breakage? Would you add a revert after that or just yank the commit out of the tree? If you add a revert and leave the original broken commit in, wouldn't it cause issues for anyone trying to bisect a build breakage? Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
