On Thursday, October 09, 2014 at 06:11:37 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
[...]
These are the qspi stuff from freescale, and I didn't understand why these goes into u-boot-arm/master. And there is no intimation of mine as well.
Did you comment on them at all please ? While I disagree with them bypassing your tree, I see they were rotting on the ML for a month and then Albert then picked those.
This is not a question of commenting - but - about the process.
Yes, I asked the author to test the changes later for a while this got pushed. I never thought this could happen so suddenly without any ping or something.
I guess some times it happens few of the patches will rotted for a while on ML due to some delays, but taking them with/out any ping causes over head if the respective owner will look at the code for later modifications.
I agree with you that there is a problem where custodians get bypassed and that such a thing happened to me as well. This is sporadic, but apparently annoying enough, so this should be added.
Issue is that the driver itself is not in a proper shape, why does subsystem patches were pushed without the the review tag from a respective custodians.
I produced a hypothesis above.
Can you retroactively comment on them and ask the author to fix the code?
Yes - I asked the author for fixing those for few of the patches against that change.
Thanks!
Please try to discuss this point as well "Each subsystem patch(es) should be pushed if and only if the respective custodian should marked the review tag"
I agree we have an issue here, but I would suggest we move this discussion into a separate thread now. The subject of the email does not match the topic of the thread by far.
Agreed - I mentioned this on this tread only for listing item on meeting, that it.
Will you join us as well? (sorry, I lost track of who will and who won't)
Best regards, Marek Vasut