On 03/04/2022 07:58, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On 02/04/22 17.07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Extend the "Respond to review comments" section of "Submitting patches" >> with reference to patch changelogs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst >> index fb496b2ebfd3..9bb4e8c0f635 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst >> @@ -318,7 +318,10 @@ understands what is going on. >> Be sure to tell the reviewers what changes you are making and to thank them >> for their time. Code review is a tiring and time-consuming process, and >> reviewers sometimes get grumpy. Even in that case, though, respond >> -politely and address the problems they have pointed out. >> +politely and address the problems they have pointed out. When sending a next >> +version, add a ``patch changelog`` to the cover letter or to individual patches >> +explaining difference aganst previous submission (see >> +:ref:`the_canonical_patch_format`). >> >> See Documentation/process/email-clients.rst for recommendations on email >> clients and mailing list etiquette. > > What about range-diffs? What about it? I extend here the versioning of patches, which does not come with range-diffs. Best regards, Krzysztof
