On 11/07/12 08:13 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 16:44 -0700, Connor Behan wrote: >> On 06/07/12 03:52 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: >>> On Don, 2012-07-05 at 17:51 -0700, Connor Behan wrote: >>>> For real this time. This allows the r128 driver to continue having 2D >>> That this patch is for the r128 driver should be mentioned on the >>> subject line (even if it was submitted to the xorg-driver-ati list :), >>> e.g. as '[PATCH xf86-video-r128] ...' >>> >>> OTOH it doesn't need to be mentioned in the Git commit log, which is >>> everything between the Subject: line and the '---' line. You can include >>> additional information for the patch submission between the latter and >>> the actual patch. >> I just uploaded a patch to the bug tracker which gets rid of the >> warnings and uses better conventions for the subject line and commit >> summary. Should I send it to this list or xorg-driver-ati? > I think the latter would be better, but either is fine. > > BTW, extra points for stripping the unrelated PLL and other > whitespace-only changes from the patch. :) Otherwise it looks pretty > good at a quick glance. > The PLL stuff was to fix debug mode so I just made it a separate patch -- they apply in either order. I'm embarrassing myself trying to send the main patch xorg-driver-ati. The list tells me that the message is too long even if I regenerate it with "git format-patch --attach".
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel