Hi, Ouuu it was fixed recently in net-next. Sorry, I missed that. Thanks for submitting policy clarification I am going to adapt to it. Thanks On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 7:18 AM Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 09:37:34PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 07:18 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:15:01AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > I prefer revisions to single patches (as opposed to large patch series) > > > > in the same thread. > > > > > > It depends which side you are in that game. From the reviewer point of > > > view, such submission breaks flow very badly. It unfolds the already > > > reviewed thread, messes with the order and many more little annoying > > > things. > > > > This is where I disagree with you. I am a reviewer here. > > It is ok, different people have different views. > > > > > Not having context to be able to inspect vN -> vN+1 is made > > more difficult not having the original patch available and > > having to search history for it. > > I'm following after specific subsystems and see all patches there, > so for me and Jakub context already exists. > > Bottom line, it depends on the workflow. > > > > > Almost no one adds URL links to older submissions below the ---. > > Too bad, maybe it is time to enforce it. > > > > > Were that a standard mechanism below the --- line, then it would > > be OK. > > So let's me summarize, we (RDMA and netdev subsystems) would like to ask > do not submit new patch revisions as reply-to. > > Thanks -- Доброї вам пори дня.
