[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130129.141859.1896760176662899961.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:18:59 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: joe@...ches.com
Cc: David.Choi@...rel.Com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Ping.Doong@...rel.Com, bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851_mll:
Implement basic statistics
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:09:18 -0800
> On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 13:55 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> Do not post new versions of patches as replies to other emails or
>> threads, always use fresh, new list postings to post a patch.
>
> I think replying with In-Reply-To: context is better
> than starting a new thread without that In-Reply-To.
>
> If the subject changes with version number, what
> difference does it make?
>
> Is there some case that patchwork doesn't handle well?
I just don't want to see patches in the middle of threads, it
confuses where it's just an RFC take or a real submission.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists