On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 12:27, Michael Witten <mfwitten@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nicolas Sebrecht > <nicolas.s-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> The --delay option may have an undesirable side effect. In case of >> non-chained emails, unrelated mails could be insterted between patches >> where *all* MUA would be affected. It's not only true for very high >> volume message mailing-lists (million monkeys receiving...). FMPOV, it's >> worse than all display issues we already know or have with the current >> behaviour. > > But it's already impossible to protect against this scenario. In that > situation, the smallest delay possible is desired, so --delay wouldn't > even be used (that is, its value would be zero). However, the transit > delay could never be small enough to guarantee that no other emails > are inserted into the patch series, so the only solution is to chain > them. At this point, we're back to the problem of arrival time, and > hence --delay becomes useful. I do agree that --delay could exacerbate the spreading out of patches. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html