Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261808AbVEVOQw (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 10:16:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261809AbVEVOQw (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 10:16:52 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:2522 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261808AbVEVOQs (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 10:16:48 -0400 Subject: Re: When we detect that a 16550 was in fact part of a NatSemi SuperIO chip From: David Woodhouse To: Russell King Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , torvalds@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <20050522144123.F12146@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <200505220008.j4M08uE9025378@hera.kernel.org> <1116763033.19183.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050522135943.E12146@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20050522144123.F12146@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 15:14:13 +0100 Message-Id: <1116771254.19183.71.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 (2.2.2-5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3315 Lines: 67 On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 14:41 +0100, Russell King wrote: > Firstly, I admit to accidentally applying David's patch, which I'm > sorry for doing. However, that can't be undone. Your apology is accepted, but isn't what I was asking for -- and neither was I asking that you undo it, which obviously isn't possible. I just wanted to you confirm that you wouldn't do it again. Wasn't that much clear from the conversation? You pointed out that I have the right not to send you patches, and I replied that I was already exercising that right, but I'd merely Cc'd you on this particular patch as a courtesy. I said "I don't want to have to stop Cc'ing you when I send patches which you might be interested in. Please either commit my patches with correct attribution, or don't commit them at all." Your reply didn't include a response to that specific request and seemed to be disagreeing. So yes, I asked for clarification because I really don't want to be in a position where I have to refuse to Cc you when making changes I know you care about... rmk: you didn't reply to my last mail. Do you want me to continue to Cc you on stuff I think you'll care about? dwmw2: because there's no point in responding any further. dwmw2: certainly not until OSDL provide the results of their investigation. rmk: I asked a specific question. Are you going to continue to take patches on which you were Cc'd merely as a courtesy, mangle the attribution, and send them on? If so, I'll refrain from Ccing you in future If you are going to either refrain from mangling the attribution, or refrain from sending them on in mangled form, then that's fine and I'll continue to Cc you. dwmw2: you know my policy, and I don't see why I should double-standard and open myself up to further flames just because your[sic] whinging and being your usual bloody minded self over this. rmk: I know your policy and that's why I sent the patch to akpm instead of to you. I Cc'd you as a courtesy. Yet you still mangled the attribution and sent my patch on. So... are you going to refrain from doing that in future, or am I going to stop Ccing you? dwmw2: oh fuck you, sorry. I'm really not in the mood for your bloody mindedness. * rmk wanders off fine. Then don't bitch in future if I change stuff without Ccing you It wasn't an unreasonable request, Russell. I didn't ask you to abandon your 'policy'; I just asked you not to apply my patches if you insist on sticking to that policy unconditionally. Again, I'm sorry if you find that request too onerous or unreasonable. I _could_ relieve you of that task by just sending patches in without letting you see them -- but as I said, I'd rather not. But if I'm really being filed to /dev/null then the question is moot. I shall simply not bother to Cc you in future when submitting patches I think you'll care about. The question is therefore answered; thank you. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/