xf86-video-dummy patch series - was "Cleanups Redux"
antoine at nagafix.co.uk
Sat Aug 5 15:02:53 UTC 2017
On 17/12/16 02:04, Emil Velikov wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> On 9 December 2016 at 22:25, Bob Terek <xorg at esoterek.com> wrote:
>> On 12/09/2016 03:13 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>> On 6 December 2016 at 22:41, Bob Terek <xorg at esoterek.com> wrote:
>>>> Resubmitting some of Aaron Plattner's cleanup patches to
>>>> . . .
>>>> . . .
>>> Afaict the patches are literally unchanged since Aaron's submit. As
>>> such changing the authorship is a bit ... bad.
>> Oops, sorry for the breach in protocol. Do I need to do something specific
>> to "withdraw" the patch I sent? Should I do something at Patchwork?
I've restored the "author" and added Bob as "Reviewed-by" instead.
> Updating patchwork would be very good, indeed.
>> I'm going to submit an alternative approach to Aaron's 6/6, and was going
>> to include the remaining cleanups, but then it was thought the cleanups
>> should be addressed separately. So then for some reason I thought they
>> needed to be submitted again, against the current version. . .
These patches have been reviewed and tested quite a few times now.
I've just created a git repo with all the uncontroversial pending
changes to the dummy driver, 6 so far:
What else can I do to help move this along?
> xorg-devel at lists.x.org: X.Org development
> Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
> Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
More information about the xorg-devel