libftdi Archives

Subject: RE: Should ftdi_read_data_submit_to() be a new call?

From: "Michael Plante" <michael.plante@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 08:06:33 -0400
Thomas Jarosch wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 13. April 2011 04:40:33 Michael Plante wrote:
>> > Dunno what to say about libftdi-1.0, but my concern was with
>> > libftdi-0.1/git, which still doesn't seem to have 3b92d47 reverted.
>>
>> As far as I can see from the archive, the discussion was still going on?

I thought Uwe had agreed, but we can wait and see what advice he has.


>> Is that thing easily revertible with git or do I need to do it manually?

Hrm.  I assume the intent is to actually commit a revert (the alternative of
rebasing the mainline seems unnecessary in this case for the trouble it'd
cause), so see:

http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-revert.html

Assuming the effective reverse patch applies cleanly, it should go easily.

That said, I've never tried the revert command, as I've never been a
maintainer of a public project, so I could get away with rebase w/o
consequence.  But it should work.

Thanks,
Michael


--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   

Current Thread