Dear Graeme Russ,
In message <4e215370.2090...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure patchwork is supposed to honor the in-reply between patch
> > versions. BTBW, is there a rationale or other documentation on the behavior
> > of patchwork somewhere?
>
> I should! - The whole point of me pain
Le 16/07/2011 11:01, Graeme Russ a écrit :
> Hi Albert,
>
> On 16/07/11 18:36, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>> Hi Greame,
>>
>> Le 15/07/2011 15:08, Graeme Russ a écrit :
>>
>>> Oh dear, it looks like Patchwork does not honour 'in-reply-to'. It has
>>> created new patches rather than updating the existing
Hi Albert,
On 16/07/11 18:36, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Greame,
>
> Le 15/07/2011 15:08, Graeme Russ a écrit :
>
>> Oh dear, it looks like Patchwork does not honour 'in-reply-to'. It has
>> created new patches rather than updating the existing ones :(
>
> I'm not sure patchwork is supposed to
Hi Greame,
Le 15/07/2011 15:08, Graeme Russ a écrit :
> Oh dear, it looks like Patchwork does not honour 'in-reply-to'. It has
> created new patches rather than updating the existing ones :(
I'm not sure patchwork is supposed to honor the in-reply between patch
versions. BTBW, is there a ration
Hi Wolfgang,
On 15/07/11 22:15, Graeme Russ wrote:
> This patch series is the first 'logical' half of the previous series titled
> '(WIP) [Timer]API Rewrite' which was a 16 part series
>
> This half (the first half) of the original series is a simplification of
> the existing API designed to corr
This patch series is the first 'logical' half of the previous series titled
'(WIP) [Timer]API Rewrite' which was a 16 part series
This half (the first half) of the original series is a simplification of
the existing API designed to correct a few 'implementation errors' and
prepare the U-Boot tree
6 matches
Mail list logo