Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On 31 January 2014 15:53, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >> PATCH 1/2 fixes a bug found by compiling the original PATCH 2/2. >> Evidence for my claim that PATCH 2/2 lets the compiler catch more type >> errors :) >> >> Markus Armbruster (2): >> qga: Fix memory allocation pasto >> Use g_new() & friends where that makes obvious sense > >> 186 files changed, 376 insertions(+), 415 deletions(-) > > No objection in principle, but I think this is going to be > hideous merge pain since it touches a huge range of files. > Could you split it up into separate patches that could > reasonably go in via the appropriate submaintainer trees?
No merge pain at all if you simply rerun the included Coccinelle patch! Splitting the patch may shift some pain from the choke point (you) to submaintainers and me. I don't mind the splitting pain. I do mind the "chase the nominal maintainer of obscure corner" pain. If you really want it split: what about splitting off just the busy and/or well-maintained subsystems?
