On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:12:50AM +0100, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Tobin C. Harding <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I would like to know the correct protocol in order to make the > > maintainers job as easy as possible please. > > > > Once a patch has been reviewed and the review makes good points that > > mean the patch is invalid/unnecessary what is the protocol from then? > > I usually go for a beer when a patch I sent is not needed(two if my > patch breaks something). If you agree that your patch is not needed, > this is the end. > > > Assuming one replies to the reviewer with thanks and acknowledging > > their points. Is it then protocol to state that you are not going to > > pursue the patch further? How do maintainers know to not bother any > > more with a patch? > > There is no universal rule that covers all cases, but in general if a > maintainer states that a patch is not needed, this is the end. Unless > someone(can be you) makes a point that clarifies the need for your > patch. In the later case the discussion will make it clear what to do > next. > > > > > Similar question; if the last patch of a patch series is not needed > > should one resend another version without the last patch or is there > > an accepted protocol to signal this so that the maintainer only looks > > at merging the initial patches in the series. > > It is easier for the maintainer to let his/her automation to take care > of the entire series. So the extra work you are going to have to > re-send will save the maintainer some work, so resend the series if > one of the patches are not needed. Exception here is if the maintainer > asks you to do differently. Got it. thanks, Tobin. _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
