linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM: Do not destroy/create devices while suspended (rev. 2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:15:06 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, rjw@...k.pl,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	lenb@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pavel@...e.cz,
	mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM: Do not destroy/create devices while suspended (rev. 2)


> The real problem is that our current email workflow patterns don't 
> provide a standardized way for maintainers to tell when a new patch 
> submission is meant to override or replace an earlier submission (or 
> even a set of earlier submissions).  Does anybody have some suggestions 
> for a good way to do this?

The versioning approach pioneered by Christoph Lameter seems to work
reasonably well.

If you post a new version increase a version number and add it with "vXXX" to the
Subject.

Also add a short change log between versions at the bottom; e.g. v1->v2: .... etc.

Then it is always clear what is the latest'n'greatest.

-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/