On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 14:41 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Paul Kocialkowski > <paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 12:39 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > > For future reference, please post new versions of the entire > > > series as > > > new threads. When posting new versions of just some individual > > > patches, > > > in-reply-to each patch being replaced is fine. I think this is > > > more > > > clear, and also gives patchwork a better chance to apply the right > > > patches for testing (not that it does igt CI, but that might > > > change). > > > > Quoting Lyude from an earlier exchange: > > * When you're doing a new revision of a patch series, it's helpful > > to > > keep it in the same email thread as the original v1 so it's > > easier > > to keep track of in people's mail clients (as well as avoiding > > accidentally reviewing older patch versions. > > > > I actually prefer it your way (posting as new threads), so I suppose > > I'll do that in the future, if Lyude doesn't have any strong > > objection > > about it. > > Yeah, new patch series = new thread, otherwise patchwork doesn't pick > it up. I know that some people like to in-reply-to the previous thread > to link stuff up, but that doesn't work with patchwork and CI. Nice, glad to hear it! > Another reason why mailing lists aren't awesome, but that's what we're > stuck with for now. Frankly, I love mailing lists, in comparison to anything web-based that basically kills my workflow and cannot be used offline. -- Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo, Finland _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
