This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 1/4] resolv: improve comments about nserv and nservall

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 03:21:42PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 06:28:31PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Thanks for your ack. My plan is to commit the 4 patches at the same
> > time, as they are linked. I am waiting for the review of the 3 other
> > patches, unless I am mistaken and that this ack is for the whole series.
> They're linked, but not dependent, but it's your personal preference I
> guess.  My concern is that it breaks the patchwork workflow, since
> you're resent the acked patch again.  I haven't looked at the other
> patches to see if they're changed, but if they're not and your
> intention was to just ping the patches, then I'd suggest using the
> method everyone else is using, which is to add [ping] to the subject
> line in reply to your original submission instead of resending the
> patch, since the latter adds an additional patch to review in
> patchwork.

One of the patch has changed, all the others got improved description
and a changelog entry. But more importantly the first version was
clearly an RFC, one of the main change between the two is that I am now
convinced it's the right thing to do.

> That, or help maintain the patchwork reviews, and I'd really be glad
> if you choose the latter :)

Yes, in that case I could simply flag the patch as superseded in
patchworks. I have just created an account, so that I can do that next

Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B       

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]