patch protocol question

[Peter Senna Tschudin]

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Tobin C. Harding <me at tobin.cc> wrote:
> I would like to know the correct protocol in order to make the
> maintainers job as easy as possible please.
>
> Once a patch has been reviewed and the review makes good points that
> mean the patch is invalid/unnecessary what is the protocol from then?

I usually go for a beer when a patch I sent is not needed(two if my
patch breaks something). If you agree that your patch is not needed,
this is the end.

> Assuming one replies to the reviewer with thanks and acknowledging
> their points. Is it then protocol to state that you are not going to
> pursue the patch further? How do maintainers know to not bother any
> more with a patch?

There is no universal rule that covers all cases, but in general if a
maintainer states that a patch is not needed, this is the end. Unless
someone(can be you) makes a point that clarifies the need for your
patch. In the later case the discussion will make it clear what to do
next.

>
> Similar question; if the last patch of a patch series is not needed
> should one resend another version without the last patch or is there
> an accepted protocol to signal this so that the maintainer only looks
> at merging the initial patches in the series.

It is easier for the maintainer to let his/her automation to take care
of the entire series. So the extra work you are going to have to
re-send will save the maintainer some work, so resend the series if
one of the patches are not needed. Exception here is if the maintainer
asks you to do differently.

>
> thanks,
> Tobin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies



-- 
Peter