On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:30:53AM -0700, Javier Cardona wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 4:45 AM, John W. Linville > <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:21:29PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > >> Thomas Pedersen <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >> > Since v1 of the mesh gate series was accidentally applied, revert > >> > the relevant v1s and apply the v2s. > >> > >> This looks ugly in the git history. IMHO it would be cleaner that you > >> would do a diff between series v1 and v2 and submit that as a proper > >> patch. > >> > >> But John might think otherwise, better to wait for his comment. > > > > That is how I would prefer it as well. > > As a general rule, should we treat patchsets sent to the list > atomically? I.e. if there are objections to a few patches in the set, > should we resubmit a v2 of the whole patchset? > (Before asking I tried to find that info here: > http://linuxwireless.org/en/developers/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > . I'll be happy to update the wiki with your response if you think > it's relevant) In general, I would prefer to see the entire patchset reposted -- that leads to less confusion for me. Hth! 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
