On 24/02/12 09:28, David Miller wrote:
> From: John Crispin <blogic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:03:10 +0100
>
>> Update from old pmu_{dis,en}able() to ckldev api.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Come on guys, don't do crap like this.
>
> When you have a 14 patch series, and I only see one or two of them
> I have no idea what in the world you want me to do with these patches.
>
> Are they dependent upon the previous patches that weren't sent to me?
>
> Are they not and I can just apply them as-is?
>
> Could I apply them as-is, but you want them to go via the MIPS tree
> for some reason and just want my ACK?
>
> Nobody knows because you didn't bother to say one way or another
> and that is extremely irritating because as a result I have to
> ask you all of these stupid questions and write this rediculious
> email.
>
> I'm just ignoring every single one of these MIPS patches, sorry.
Hi,
you are right, totally stupid of me to waste other peoples time like this.
I forgot the following things
* mention that i would welcome a ack'ed by from you
* mention that these patches should go via MIPS with the other patches
in the series
* I should have put in the commit messages, that you were CC'ed on, what
the rest of the series does
* on the last "fix locking issues" patch I also forgot to CC Ralf and MIPS
One question if I may ask
* do you want to be CC'ed for a full series even if only 1 patch relates
to netdev or should I simply think more about the commit message so it
is apparent what i expect ?
again, sorry for wasting your time with stupidity ... I will clean up
the mess I made during today ...
hope you accept my apology,
John
