* Qais Yousef <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> I will wait for the maintainers to see if they would like a v5 to address
> the nitpicks or it's actually good enough and happy to pick this up. I
> think the commit messages explain the problem clear enough and doesn't
> warrant sending a new version. But happy to do so if there's insistence
> :-)
Yeah, please always do that: sensible review replies with actionable
feedback cause a semi-atomatic "mark this thread as read, there will be a
next version" reflexive action from maintainers, especially if a series is
in its 4th iteration already...
Thanks,
Ingo
On 09/14/23 08:39, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Qais Yousef <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <[email protected]>
> >
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > I will wait for the maintainers to see if they would like a v5 to address
> > the nitpicks or it's actually good enough and happy to pick this up. I
> > think the commit messages explain the problem clear enough and doesn't
> > warrant sending a new version. But happy to do so if there's insistence
> > :-)
>
> Yeah, please always do that: sensible review replies with actionable
> feedback cause a semi-atomatic "mark this thread as read, there will be a
> next version" reflexive action from maintainers, especially if a series is
> in its 4th iteration already...
Apologies. I did realize that and intended to send a new version last weekend,
but failed to get to it. I hope to be able to do so today or tomorrow.
Thanks!
--
Qais Yousef