linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] media: Documentation: Improve grammar in DVB API

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: <221b6c0b-ac23-4b27-804a-aab9e563453d@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 16:44:39 +0300
From: Hanne-Lotta Mäenpää <hannelotta@...il.com>
To: David Hunter <david.hunter.linux@...il.com>, mchehab@...nel.org
Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev, skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] media: Documentation: Improve grammar in DVB API

Hello,

On 7/10/25 7:22 AM, David Hunter wrote:
> On 7/8/25 11:52, Hanne-Lotta Mäenpää wrote:
>> Fix typos and punctuation and improve grammar in documentation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hanne-Lotta Mäenpää <hannelotta@...il.com>
> 
> Overall, good work. Here is a suggestion for future patch series:

Thank you very much!

> Subsequent versions of patch series should be posted as replies in the same thread. Currently, each version is its own independent thread, which makes it hard to track changes. This link has the documentation for the proper way to handle subsequent patches:
> 
> https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/SubmittingPatches.html
> 
> The relevant part starts at "To that end, send them as replies to either..."

I wonder which way is preferred. I have been reading the kernel 
documentation at 
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#explicit-in-reply-to-headers

Quoting the instructions:

"However, for a multi-patch series, it is generally best to avoid using 
In-Reply-To: to link to older versions of the series."

> Another good practice is to have the previous versions' links from "lore.kernel.org" directly in the change log.

Good point, thank you. I will start to include the links to previous 
versions.

> Thanks,
> David Hunter

How come there are two sets of documentation?

Best regards,

Hanne-Lotta Mäenpää