On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 16:03 -0400, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > Hi all, > > There seems to be some confusion because of the way I use RFC. I've > (unless otherwise stated in the PR) intended RFC for looking over code > and commenting before I debug and test (e.g. to make sure the approach > is even in the right ballpark). > > I will try to make that clear in the PR from now on, since that seems to > be non-standard usage and people expect RFC to be working code.
Also, since it seems to be non-standard usage I will use URFC (Untest Request For Comments) so as to alert the reader it's not a standard RFC, but is intended as code/design review before the code gets tested and debugged. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
