On 10 May 2012 22:05, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: > Am 10.05.2012 22:35, schrieb Peter Maydell: >> Something this >> big is just too painful to work with. > > I don't see your point. Our mailboxes have thousands of messages either > way, you've only been cc'ed on those you are in MAINTAINERS for, and > applying 5 patches from a 74-patch series is not more work than applying > 5 patches from a 5-patch series, is it?
It is, because it requires work from me to be sure that I have all the intended patches and none of the unintended ones. A five patch series is a small and clearly bounded set of work; a 74 patch series is a much bigger job, because the assumption is that there are interdependencies within it such that it doesn't make sense to review only a small part of it, otherwise the submitter would have split it up in the first place. (My mail client makes no distinction between qemu-devel messages I get cc'd on and ones I don't, incidentally.) > This series is put together in such a way that it achieves a goal: > removing cpu_state_reset(). I can send you these and more patches > refactoring ARM devices but then it'll be perceived as "just churn". > 74 sounds like much, but the patches are pretty easy to review, no? > These 74 are a subset of a currently 138-patch series and growing - > that's why agreeing on a merge order for qom-next is so important to me. > > If I send these out in series of 5 patches and wait for each to get > merged through different trees then by the current rate of applying > this'll take years, especially if we're blocked by unmaintained targets... If you just want a reviewed-by from me and to put the whole series in to the tree via some other route that's also fine by me. -- PMM
