Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757178AbZJ1Gk1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:40:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756863AbZJ1Gk1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:40:27 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:43717 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756851AbZJ1Gk0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:40:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:40:09 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sam Ravnborg , LKML , Nicolas Pitre , "Luck, Tony" , Stephen Rothwell , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Jeff Garzik , Robert Richter , Dmitry Torokhov , Jean Delvare , Linus Torvalds , "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [RFC] to rebase or not to rebase on linux-next Message-ID: <20091028064009.GA6353@elte.hu> References: <57C9024A16AD2D4C97DC78E552063EA3E33D0174@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> <20091023134115.GD27097@elte.hu> <20091023191631.GA1879@elte.hu> <1256326512.26028.34.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20091023205400.GA8356@elte.hu> <20091023215958.GA4139@merkur.ravnborg.org> <1256599588.26028.340.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20091027075954.GA32640@elte.hu> <1256657956.26028.408.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1256657956.26028.408.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1442 Lines: 34 * Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 08:59 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > For any reasonably complex change you simply need to wait a bit > > anyway to gather feedback. And for trivial/obvious/small patches it > > makes little sense to upset the Git history just to add the tags. > > > > (And if there's frequent problems with small changes that were > > supposed to be easy you need to revisit the quality process.) > > Sure, but I'm not talking about changing the patch, I'm talking about > a late "reviewed by" or "tested-by". These usually do come after a > patch set has been moved into the final git push. It would be nice to > flag a commit that it was tested by someone. If you want to make your patches dependent on acks then you first need to send out those patches with an '[RFC]' added, and put into a branch hierarchy (rfc/* would be fine) that i sure wont pull from you. You can also send obvious/small/own patches out for immediate pull. In that case extra review can still be done after you sent patches out. Mistakes noticed during review will be credited in terms of future Reported-by tags. People do this frequently. Ingo -- 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/