On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Laurentiu Palcu wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > No, please don't - you're missing the point. The point is that now Lee > > has applied the other patch you're not sending two patches any more, > > you're sending a single patch. This isn't patch 1/2, it's just a single > > patch by itself now. > All I did was send new revisions of the 1/2 patch using the > --in-reply-to option of git-send-email, with the message-id of the > original version. I used to do this for other projects I contributed to, > so I didn't have to re-send the entire series for just one patch that The whole point is that you're not sending a series, you're just sending one patch. > needs to be changed. Mail clients, at least the ones I use (mutt, > evolution), order the mails nicely and you have all the history in one > thread. So, one can see the cover letter of the series and the other > original patches in the series, together with the new revisions of the > changed patch. Of course, if more patches needed change, I would re-send a new > series. Definitely do *not* do this, it makes the thread very hard to follow if there are multiple versions - you end up with multiple versions of various patches scattered through the thread and it can be very unclear which versions are current. If there's a lot of traffic things get hidden way back when the original submission happened. Fortunately I've deleted old parts of the thread so I didn't notice you were doing this. > So, Mark, can you please instruct me (a link to a page explaining the > workflow would be fine too) what is the exact workflow you are/were > expecting? The patch submission workflow is covered in SubmittingPatches.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
