On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 6:08 AM Zhang Rui <rui.zh...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> One thing to mention is that, all the patches have been tested in
> linux-next for weeks, but there is a conflict detected, because
> upstream has took commit eaf7b46083a7e34 ("docs: thermal: add it to the
> driver API") from jc-docs tree while I'm keeping a wrong version of the
> patch, so I just rebased my tree to fix this.
Why do I have to say this EVERY single release?
A conflict is not a reason to rebase. Conflicts happen. They happen a
lot. I deal with them, and it's usually trivial.
If you feel it's not trivial, just describe what the resolution is,
rather than rebasing. Really.
Rebasing for a random conflict (particularly in documentation, for
chrissake!) is like using an atomic bomb to swat a fly. You have all
those downsides, and there are basically _no_ upsides. It only makes
for more work for me because I have to re-write this email for the
millionth time, and that takes longer and is more aggravating than the
conflict would have taken to just sort out.
Linus
