From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751708AbWD0Vl5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:41:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751709AbWD0Vl4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:41:56 -0400 Received: from relay02.mail-hub.dodo.com.au ([202.136.32.45]:63108 "EHLO relay02.mail-hub.dodo.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751708AbWD0Vl4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:41:56 -0400 From: Grant Coady To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.17-rc2-mm1 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:41:52 +1000 Organization: http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/ Message-ID: References: <20060427014141.06b88072.akpm@osdl.org> <20060427121930.2c3591e0.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060427121930.2c3591e0.akpm@osdl.org> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:19:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >I don't like dropping patches. Because then the thing needs to be fixed up >and resent and remerged and re-reviewed and rejects need to re-fixed-up and >this adds emailing overhead and 12-24 hour turnaround, etc. I very much >prefer to hang onto the patch and get it fixed up. This means that I >usually have to do the fixing-up. Perhaps dropping patches with obvious faults with some feedback to submitter may reduce your workload ;) And is slowing down the merge a little in these cases such a bad thing if it improves patch quality over time? Grant.