Hi Jes, On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Hi Jes, >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:05 AM, <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> rtl8723bu_init_bt() is effectively the function enabling RF, so name >>> it appropriately. >> >> Should this be merged into the patches that introduce these functions? > > Again, this would be rewriting history and simply cause me to fight a > pile of patch conflicts rebasing things, for no gain, and at the risk of > introducing new errors in the process. Totally agree, this is definitely something that would cause conflicts. IMHO, history is only important if multiple people have contributed to something or it's being developed in public - which, for Linux, I define as it being in a maintainer's repository. This patch set looks like you've been playing around with a bunch of stuff, completed *bu support, then just thrown it all over the wall without "prettying" it up for review and submission. If I were developing this I'd have happily rewritten history even if all I did was reduce the number of patches by squashing later fixes into earlier patches. I can see a lot of scope for reducing the number of patches in this patch set, so if you'd like me to play around with that, just ask. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
