Hi Quentin, On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 10:09, Quentin Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > On 5/26/25 10:35 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Quentin, > > > > On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 08:48, Quentin Schulz <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Simon, > >> > >> On 5/24/25 7:42 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Update this command to use a -c flag rather than a special 'clear' > >>> argument. > >>> > >> > >> I don't see the commit which adds the clear command to either master or > >> next branch, so maybe just fix that in the original commit before > >> sending a pull request instead of via fixups? > > > > Tom rejected that series (or 'changes requested' to be specific). I > > added it to my tree in merge-request 68: > > > > d93f42d6e3d bootstd: Provide a command to select the bootdev order > > > > If changes are required to merge the merge request and considering that > you are the owner of both the patch being fixed up and the merge > request, maybe sending a vN+1 instead of fixups would make sense? > Especially if you haven't sent the "applied" mails like you say below? > > I would rather avoid reviewing patches on top of commits that may never > make it to the main tree. > > >> > >> Did I miss something instead maybe? > > > > I didn't send out my 'applied' emails for this series, so it was > > silently applied to my tree, so far as the mailing list was concerned. > > Tom wants me to operate my tree silently so I don't always send the > > emails... > > > > I don't want to pour fuel on the fire but this whole ordeal between you > and Tom needs to be sorted out, I'm essentially not even looking at any > of your patches anymore even when I'm in Cc/To. From an outsider PoV, > the situation is confusing and frustrating. Please do not take this as > an invitation to include me in the "fights". Nobody likes to see > arguments lasting months even if they are not part of it. "Fights" may > sometimes be necessary and healthy for a project but this has become > anxiety-provoking to me, hence my reluctance to look at any thread you > both are part of. I also want to be able to again trust that the few > reviews I occasionally make on the mailing list are useful because they > are for patches that have a chance of being merged and based on code > that was merged or soon to be merged (in a maintainer tree with high > chances of being merged in a subsequent merge request to the main tree).
Thanks for your comments. I fully agree. Regards, Simon
