From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752688Ab3CGGrb (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Mar 2013 01:47:31 -0500 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:33038 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751153Ab3CGGra (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Mar 2013 01:47:30 -0500 Message-ID: <51383800.7000608@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 23:47:28 -0700 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe Perches CC: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcin Slusarz , Lucas Stach , Borislav Petkov , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, Maarten Lankhorst , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] get_maintainer: prevent keywords from matching filenames References: <1362616141-13947-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1362616141-13947-3-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1362616252.2093.37.camel@joe-AO722> <5137E09E.1060006@wwwdotorg.org> <1362616810.2093.40.camel@joe-AO722> In-Reply-To: <1362616810.2093.40.camel@joe-AO722> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/06/2013 05:40 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 17:34 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 03/06/2013 05:30 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 17:29 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>> From: Stephen Warren >>>> >>>> This reverts most of eb90d08 "get_maintainer: allow keywords to match >>>> filenames"; all except the parts that are required to implement the new >>>> N: entry type. >>> >>> Just combine patches 1 and 3 into a single patch. >> >> That would break bisectability; using MAINTAINERS after applying a >> squashed 1+3 but without patch 2 applied would not operate as desired. > > > > Which is why I showed the whole thing in a single patch. > No worries if it's simply to increase the patch count... I'm not sure what showed refers to? I guess if I squashed /everything/ into a single commit (i.e. the change to the Tegra section in MAINTAINERS too) then there wouldn't be any bisect issues. I really don't care about patch count. The reason for >1 patch is that there's often push-back if doing logically separate things (adding N: feature, modifying a MAINTAINERS entry to use it, removing part of K: feature) in a single patch...