On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 07:43:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > A great deal of mailing lists contain numerous protections against
> > things like flooding and spamming. One of those protections is a
> > check for "Too many recipients to the message
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 07:43:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> A great deal of mailing lists contain numerous protections against
> things like flooding and spamming. One of those protections is a
> check for "Too many recipients to the message". Most of the time this
> simply requires moderator in
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> [REQUEST]
>
> Would it be possible for the patches that have already received Acked-by's in
> this series to be accepted and applied to the tree? I lost an Acked-by (in
> intel-panel.c) because it had a merge conflict with a new change that came in
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:48:57PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > What's the merge plan for this set?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. My assumption is that first all the patches
> need to get an Acked-by and only then will the series get applied by
>
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:48:57PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > What's the merge plan for this set?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. My assumption is that first all the patches
> need to get an Acked-by and only then will the series get applied by
>
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:48:57PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> What's the merge plan for this set?
I'm not sure what you mean. My assumption is that first all the patches
need to get an Acked-by and only then will the series get applied by
Thierry... Could Thierry or Uwe weigh in on this point pleas
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 09:49:34AM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 07:57:12PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > [REQUEST]
> >
> > Would it be possible for the patches that have already received Acked-by's
> > in
> > this series to be accepted and applied to the tree? I
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> [REQUEST]
>
> Would it be possible for the patches that have already received Acked-by's in
> this series to be accepted and applied to the tree? I lost an Acked-by (in
> intel-panel.c) because it had a merge conflict with a new change that came in
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 04:37:55PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 09:49:34AM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 07:57:12PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > > [REQUEST]
> > >
> > > Would it be possible for the patches that have already received
[REQUEST]
Would it be possible for the patches that have already received Acked-by's in
this series to be accepted and applied to the tree? I lost an Acked-by (in
intel-panel.c) because it had a merge conflict with a new change that came in
after I rebased to tip. I wasn't sure earlier about accep
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 07:57:12PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> [REQUEST]
>
> Would it be possible for the patches that have already received Acked-by's in
> this series to be accepted and applied to the tree? I lost an Acked-by (in
> intel-panel.c) because it had a merge conflict with a new
11 matches
Mail list logo
