linux-kernel - Re: git send-email friendly smtp provider anyone?

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]

Message-ID: <20221122185001.q6hmeblp64jqdzvz@meerkat.local>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 13:50:01 -0500
From:   Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Noralf Trønnes <noralf@...nnes.org>
Cc:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git send-email friendly smtp provider anyone?

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 06:42:19PM +0100, Noralf Trønnes wrote:
> The first thing that strikes me is that everyone mentioned in one of the
> patches get the entire patchset, even stable@...r.kernel.org (cc'ed in a
> fixes patch). The first patch touches a core file and as a result a few
> drivers, so I've cc'ed the driver maintainers in that patch, but now
> they get the entire patchset where 5 of 6 patches is about a driver that
> I maintain. So from their point of view, they see a patchset about a
> driver they don't care about and a patch touching a core file, but from
> the subject it's not apparent that it touches their driver. I'm afraid
> that this might result in none of them looking at that patch. In this
> particular case it's not that important, but in another case it might be.

I did some (unscientific) polling among kernel maintainers and, by a vast
margin, they always prefer to receive the entire series instead of
cherry-picked patches -- having the entire series helps provide important
context for the change they are looking at.

So, this is deliberate and, for now at least, not configurable. Unless you're
sending 100+ patch series, I doubt anyone will have any problem with receiving
the whole series instead of individual patches.

> As for the setting up the web endpoint, should I just follow the b4 docs
> on that?
> 
> I use b4 version 0.10.1, is that recent enough?

Yes. There will be a 0.10.2 in the near future, but the incoming fixes
shouldn't make much difference for the b4 send code.

-K