Re: Please pull from 'for-2.6.28' branch

On Oct 20, 2008, at 10:51 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:45 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

quoted

If you had conventions on naming this is the first I've heard of
them.  I know Paul asked about the [POWERPC] to powerpc: change on
list.

Well, they weren't official, but others seem to have picked them up,  
no
big deal but heh, here now you know about them :-)

quoted

I do so as well.  As stated above, if there are naming conventions
that are desired I'm happy to conform but just need to know what they
are.

Well, my aim is mostly consistency. If you don't like what I want, I'm
happy to discuss it, but I'd like basically to keep consistency in the
naming conventions. In some cases though, my comment also refers to  
the
subject being a tad too vague to my taste. I know there isn't a strict
definition of what is good enough or not and we definitely don't  
want a
3 lines novel there, but in the case of the .dts file update, it would
have been useful to highlight that fact for example.

As stated, I know now so I'm happy to conform.

quoted

The limit is based on trust.  I submitted all the other cleanup
patches to remove PPC_MERGE.  I think I can handle such a patch going
via my tree.

I would have still preferred if we had discussed it before hand...

Yeah, see my previous gripe about trivial patches and my tree :)

- k