From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933398Ab0JRVgb (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:36:31 -0400 Received: from fifo99.com ([67.223.236.141]:45523 "EHLO fifo99.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933388Ab0JRVg3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:36:29 -0400 Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree From: Daniel Walker To: Nicolas Pitre Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Kerr , Jeff Ohlstein In-Reply-To: References: <20101018103540.7bd9c535.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <201010182219.25890.arnd@arndb.de> <1287434251.5588.23.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <201010182248.36078.arnd@arndb.de> <1287435928.5588.37.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:35:58 -0700 Message-ID: <1287437758.5588.59.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 17:17 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > I guess your assuming I send my pull request after Russell's, which > > isn't necessarily true, and I'd rather not have that dependency if I > > don't have to. > > Look, we're not establishing a straight rule here -- just figuring out a > way to move forward. What we're asking you to do is either ask RMK to > pull your tree now, or wait until RMK's tree has hit mainline so you can > pull Linus' tree and fix the issue yourself before asking Linus to pull, > or whatever. Is some collaboration on your part for this particular > issue too much to ask for? I'm always very cooperative, if you read back in the thread I basically suggested I would be sending a pull request to Russell. That was prior to Arnd'd comments. Daniel