These patches mirror the commit history of changes done to
xf86-input-keyboard in the NetBSD xsrc repository (except perhaps
for timing between patches for different files).
I'm willing to squash or edit patches to reduce the number of diffs;
please advise on what you want combined in this way.
O
On 07/26/13 02:23 PM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
These patches mirror the commit history of changes done to
xf86-input-keyboard in the NetBSD xsrc repository (except perhaps
for timing between patches for different files).
I'm willing to squash or edit patches to reduce the number of diffs;
please a
> From: Thomas Klausner
> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 23:23:55 +0200
>
> These patches mirror the commit history of changes done to
> xf86-input-keyboard in the NetBSD xsrc repository (except perhaps
> for timing between patches for different files).
>
> I'm willing to squash or edit patches to reduc
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:59:53PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > From: Thomas Klausner
> > Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 23:23:55 +0200
> >
> > These patches mirror the commit history of changes done to
> > xf86-input-keyboard in the NetBSD xsrc repository (except perhaps
> > for timing between patche
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:40:33PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> For patches 1-7, 9-11, while I can't verify you've chosen the right
> values for those keycodes, I assume you and your users have already tested
> that out, and since the way you've set them looks fine:
> Reviewed-by: Alan Coope
On 07/28/13 07:28 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:40:33PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Since this is a huge pile of patches, and you've been upstreaming a lot lately,
is it time to discuss git commit access so you can push them yourself instead
of having to wait both for
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 02:54:54PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 07/28/13 07:28 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> >On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:40:33PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> >>Since this is a huge pile of patches, and you've been upstreaming a lot
> >>lately,
> >>is it time to discuss gi
