[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251013043812.13186-1-benx.guo@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 04:38:10 +0000
From: Ben Guo <benx.guo@...il.com>
To: si.yanteng@...ux.dev
Cc: a.hindborg@...nel.org,
alex.gaynor@...il.com,
alexs@...nel.org,
aliceryhl@...gle.com,
bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com,
boqun.feng@...il.com,
corbet@....net,
dakr@...nel.org,
dzm91@...t.edu.cn,
gary@...yguo.net,
hust-os-kernel-patches@...glegroups.com,
justinstitt@...gle.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
lossin@...nel.org,
morbo@...gle.com,
nathan@...nel.org,
nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com,
ojeda@...nel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
tmgross@...ch.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] docs/zh_CN: Add translation of rust/testing.rst
Hi Yanteng,
I’d like to confirm the expected use of the In-Reply-To header for versioned patches.
In my case:
[PATCH] -> Message-ID: <20250929163531.376092-1-benx.guo@...il.com>
[PATCH v2] -> Message-ID: <20251003074939.465517-1-benx.guo@...il.com>
[PATCH v2] -> In-Reply-To: <20250929163531.376092-1-benx.guo@...il.com>
That means the v2 patch points back to the v1 message ID.
Could you please confirm whether I should start a new thread for [PATCH v2], or if there’s something wrong with how I used the In-Reply-To header?
Thanks for helping clarify this.
Thanks,
Ben Guo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists