From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753461AbbDMIcW (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2015 04:32:22 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179]:38065 "EHLO mail-wi0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752950AbbDMIcR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2015 04:32:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [95.23.56.200] In-Reply-To: <20150409125927.GC12339@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20150404074337.GA31064@amd> <20150404102435.GR20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20150404171116.GA15025@Nokia-N900> <20150404200307.GS20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20150409074238.GA22603@amd> <20150409091017.GA4526@earth> <20150409112943.GA31173@amd> <20150409121913.GB18713@earth> <20150409123155.GB9563@amd> <20150409125927.GC12339@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:32:16 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHv7] media: i2c/adp1653: fix includes From: Javier Martinez Canillas To: =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= Cc: Pavel Machek , Sebastian Reichel , Sakari Ailus , Andrew Morton , kernel list , linux-arm-kernel , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Lindgren , Kevin Hilman , Aaro Koskinen , ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com, Patrik Bachan , Kumar Gala , Benoit Cousson , m.chehab@samsung.com, "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , mchehab@osg.samsung.com, hverkuil@xs4all.nl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Pali, On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 09 April 2015 14:43:59 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> >> Please re-spin your previous patch and submit it properly. >> >> Best regards, >> Javier > > Hi all! What about stopping this meaningless discussion about resending > full patch series when everybody know how to fix is quickly in editor > (e.g with sed under 5s) and not wasting another 10 minutes to generate > new unified diff sent via SMTP protocol? > No, there is a reason why we have written rules on how patches should be submitted. Everyone in the kernel community is expected to optimize their workflow according to these rules to make life easier for people reviewing and merging the patches. As you said now someone has to fix this using an editor and that is an error prone process. Besides, why it would take 10 minutes to generate a proper patch-set? git is very good on this regard (i.e: git commit ---fixup && git rebase -i && git format-patch && git send-email). I won't argue anymore but I find very sad that people who have been in the kernel community for years don't follow the basic rules we have documented it. So I wonder why we have the documentation in the first place and how can we expect newcomers to follow if even experienced kernel hackers don't. > -- > Pali Rohár > pali.rohar@gmail.com Best regards, Javier From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: javier@dowhile0.org (Javier Martinez Canillas) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:32:16 +0200 Subject: [PATCHv7] media: i2c/adp1653: fix includes In-Reply-To: <20150409125927.GC12339@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20150404074337.GA31064@amd> <20150404102435.GR20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20150404171116.GA15025@Nokia-N900> <20150404200307.GS20756@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20150409074238.GA22603@amd> <20150409091017.GA4526@earth> <20150409112943.GA31173@amd> <20150409121913.GB18713@earth> <20150409123155.GB9563@amd> <20150409125927.GC12339@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello Pali, On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Pali Roh?r wrote: > On Thursday 09 April 2015 14:43:59 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> >> Please re-spin your previous patch and submit it properly. >> >> Best regards, >> Javier > > Hi all! What about stopping this meaningless discussion about resending > full patch series when everybody know how to fix is quickly in editor > (e.g with sed under 5s) and not wasting another 10 minutes to generate > new unified diff sent via SMTP protocol? > No, there is a reason why we have written rules on how patches should be submitted. Everyone in the kernel community is expected to optimize their workflow according to these rules to make life easier for people reviewing and merging the patches. As you said now someone has to fix this using an editor and that is an error prone process. Besides, why it would take 10 minutes to generate a proper patch-set? git is very good on this regard (i.e: git commit ---fixup && git rebase -i && git format-patch && git send-email). I won't argue anymore but I find very sad that people who have been in the kernel community for years don't follow the basic rules we have documented it. So I wonder why we have the documentation in the first place and how can we expect newcomers to follow if even experienced kernel hackers don't. > -- > Pali Roh?r > pali.rohar at gmail.com Best regards, Javier