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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 5 Nov 2015 11:31:05 -0700
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Gilad Ben Yossef <giladb@...hip.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/email-clients.txt: discuss In-Reply-To

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:13:01 -0400
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com> 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-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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ