* Quite trivial patches listed as needing re-review? (was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23)
@ 2007-07-11 17:31 Jesper Juhl
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Jesper Juhl @ 2007-07-11 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 10/07/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
[snip]
> submitchecklist-update-fix-spelling-error.patch
...
>
> Merge, subject to re-review.
>
...
> add-missing-files-and-dirs-to-00-index-in-documentation.patch
> remove-the-last-few-umsdos-leftovers.patch
...
> Merge, subject to re-review.
[snip]
Can't speak for all the other patches, but the 3 listed above are
quite trivial and hardly touch any code at all. I'm wondering why they
are not just pushed upstream, but instead listed as "subject to
re-review" ?
Am I supposed to do anything to get them merged?
--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2007-07-11 17:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-07-11 17:31 Quite trivial patches listed as needing re-review? (was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) Jesper Juhl
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®