2012/2/23 Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:17:05AM +0800, Elric Fu wrote: >> 2012/2/22 Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> > On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 01:32:27PM +0800, Elric Fu wrote: >> > Perfect, thanks! I'll send this off to Greg. The only thing you needed >> > was to Cc the stable mailing list. >> >> Thank you very much. I learn a lot of things from you. About Cc the >> stable mail list, I always thought I shouldn't cc stable and if the patch >> is done I should send the patch to maintainer then the maintainer will >> submit it to stable. It seems like a mistake. Do you mean I should cc >> the stable if the patch is done? > > Hmm, you should probably ask Greg about the stable mailing list and when > things get sent to it. Here's my understanding: > > You are correct that only the final patch should be sent to the stable > mailing list. That's sent automatically when Linus pulls a new > patch into his tree, but only if the stable mailing address is at the > end of the patch description. If someone forgets to put the Cc stable > line in the patch description, it's very likely to not make it into > stable. > > You can rely on the subsystem maintainer to add the stable CC line if > you wish. Not all of them are very good at sending things to stable > though, so you might want to do it yourself. > > If I have an RFC patch that I know will need to go into stable, I add > the Cc stable line in the description of the body. However, when I send > the RFC patch out, I make sure that it doesn't get sent to the stable > mailing list (this may require controlling what git send-email does). > When I send a pull request off to Greg, I don't send the mail off to the > stable list then either. > > I think that Greg's pull request to Linus also doesn't include the > stable mailing list, but I'm not sure. I think that only when the final > patch goes into Linus' tree does it get sent to the stable mailing list. > >> I have another question about submitting patch. If I find a bug and >> submit a patch to give a solution, Shall I send a mail that the prefix >> of subject is [RFC] then send a patch when the patch is done, or >> send the mail that the subject is prefixed by [PATCH] and after >> discussion send the final patch the subject is prefixed by >> [PATCH vx]? > > RFC is basically for new features, and PATCH is for bug fixes. So even > with your first bug fix patch, you probably want to use PATCH. > > As you revise the patch or patchset, you'll use [RFC vx] or [PATCH vx] > for the different versions. Sometimes for a large patchset, a group of > patches will be uncontroversial, and you'll do a revision of just a > couple patches with the vx marking. > > If you're cool, you'll find the original message ID from the individual > v2 patch and set the In-Reply-To field in the mail header to that ID for > your v3 patch. But if you're completely redoing the patchset and > sending the whole patchset, don't set the In-Reply-To field. > > See this thread for an example of using the In-Reply-To and vx markings: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/57705 > > But all of this is just personal preferences, really. You'll do fine if > all you do is remember [PATCH] or [RFC]. After all, anything in square > brackets gets stripped off when it's imported into git, so that only > matters for mailing list members. :) > > Hope this helps and isn't too confusing! Thank you very much for your answers. Those gave me a great favor and answered my questions that confused me since a long time ago. I really appreciate it. Best Regards, Elric Fu > > Sarah Sharp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
