On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:38:44 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com> wrote:

quoted text
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 11:11 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > James Bottomley wrote:
> > > The initial bsg submit went via the block git tree ... which I believe
> > > you have in -mm.  We only started taking the updates via the scsi tree
> > 
> > Seven hours before you posted this, in 
> > <20070807001429.f8cb3b22.akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Andrew already 
> > noted it was not in -mm.
> > 
> > A trivial examination of the broken-out mm patches backs up the absence 
> >   of Jens' block tree, too.
> > 
> > So let's put this myth / bad assumption to rest, shall we?
> 
> Sorry ... I just assumed from the fact that it had been in the block git
> tree for six months that it was also in -mm.

bsg was never in the #for-akpm branch of git-block.  So I assume that
Jens had it in some other branch and for some reason never pulled it
across into #for-akpm.

It was most reasonable of you to expect that bsg had received a decent
run in -mm.
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/