* Re: Cleanups in "next" tree
[not found] ` <20200402225745.GA9830@amd>
@ 2020-04-03 12:49 ` Dan Murphy
[not found] ` <a4802e70-106b-3476-536f-1d8798ce156f@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Dan Murphy @ 2020-04-03 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Machek, Jacek Anaszewski; +Cc: linux-leds, LKML
Pavel
On 4/2/20 5:57 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sun 2020-03-22 14:35:56, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>> Hi Pavel,
>>
>> On 3/22/20 12:59 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I've commited some cleanups into LED tree ( git/pavel/linux-leds.git
>>> branch for-next ), if someone wants to review them.
>> You abused your maintainer power by bypassing the usual patch
>> submission procedure. Please remove the patches from linux-next
>> and submit them officially for discussion. I would have some objections
>> to them.
> I'm sorry I failed to meet your high expectations... But I don't
> believe I done anything completely outside of usual kernel procedures.
So I can push a public tree out and request reviewers to review that
tree and expect it to get merged once the review is complete without
ever posting the patches to linux-leds?
This would be the precedent you are setting here as maintainer.
And Jacek does not have high expectations he is just requesting that we
follow the process as defined in the Linux kernel document
Dan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Cleanups in "next" tree
[not found] ` <a4802e70-106b-3476-536f-1d8798ce156f@gmail.com>
@ 2020-04-03 19:07 ` Dan Murphy
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Dan Murphy @ 2020-04-03 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jacek Anaszewski, Pavel Machek; +Cc: linux-leds, LKML
Pavel
On 4/3/20 1:45 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> On 4/3/20 12:57 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Sun 2020-03-22 14:35:56, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>>
>>> On 3/22/20 12:59 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> I've commited some cleanups into LED tree ( git/pavel/linux-leds.git
>>>> branch for-next ), if someone wants to review them.
>>> You abused your maintainer power by bypassing the usual patch
>>> submission procedure. Please remove the patches from linux-next
>>> and submit them officially for discussion. I would have some objections
>>> to them.
>> I'm sorry I failed to meet your high expectations... But I don't
>> believe I done anything completely outside of usual kernel procedures.
> I believe code review is quite usual kernel procedure.
>
>> Could you list the patches and objections you have?
> I already expressed my concerns regarding Turris Omnia patch.
>
> My comments regarding remaining patches:
>
> - "Make label "white:power" to be consistent with"
>
> I disagree here. "system" was OK.
>
> - "Warn about old defines that probably should not be used."
>
> Obsolete is only LED_FULL, so the comment is in wrong line
I would prefer to have the commit sha that obsoleted the LED_FULL to be
referenced in the commit message so we have traceability.
Dan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-04-03 19:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20200322115906.GA10623@duo.ucw.cz>
[not found] ` <3a103317-b9fb-5d0f-6944-0114b9af1629@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20200402225745.GA9830@amd>
2020-04-03 12:49 ` Cleanups in "next" tree Dan Murphy
[not found] ` <a4802e70-106b-3476-536f-1d8798ce156f@gmail.com>
2020-04-03 19:07 ` Dan Murphy
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).