On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:19:19PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:50 AM, John W. Linville > <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > After being chided for having an excessive number of patches in -next > > with "Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx", I would prefer to avoid (or strongly > > limit) merging such patches that way. > > Is this a bad thing? The point was that if it was a fix worth of consideration for stable then it generally ought to be worth of consideration for the current release. > Come to think of it we didn't get OTP patches in for 2.6.36 so I am > not considering we should just disable AR9003 from the PCI ID list for > ath9k as all cards sold should have it so in that case this patch > would just need to go to 2.6.37 and not 2.6.36. Do you perhaps mean "need to go to 2.6.38 and not 2.6.37"? John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. -- 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
