On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:13:01 -0400 Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > +When manually adding In-Reply-To: headers to a patch (e.g., using `git > +send email`), use common sense to associate the patch with previous > +relevant discussion, e.g. link a bug fix to the email with the bug report. > +For a multi-patch series, it is generally best to avoid using > +In-Reply-To: to link to older versions of the series. This way > +multiple versions of the patch don't become an unmanageable forest of > +references in email clients. If a link is helpful, you can use an > +"http://lkml.kernel.org/r/MESSAGEID"; URL (e.g., in the cover email > +text) to link to an earlier version of the patch series. So this is sitting in my docs folder waiting to see if anybody else had anything to say. Nope. I guess I'm not opposed to this addition, but I'm not quite sure what problem is being solved. Is there a plague of inappropriate hand-crafted In-Reply-To headers out there that I've not seen? Beyond that, this seems like advice that is better put into SubmittingPatches if we really want it. Thanks, jon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
