netdev - [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230823154922.1162644-1-kuba@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 08:49:22 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: davem@...emloft.net
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to

It's somewhat unfortunate but with (my?) the current tooling
if people post new versions of a set in reply to an old version
managing the review queue gets difficult. So recommend against it.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
---
 Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
index 2ab843cde830..c1c732e9748b 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
@@ -167,6 +167,8 @@ Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
 patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the
 bottom of the priority list.
 
+.. _Changes requested:
+
 Changes requested
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
@@ -359,6 +361,10 @@ Make sure you address all the feedback in your new posting. Do not post a new
 version of the code if the discussion about the previous version is still
 ongoing, unless directly instructed by a reviewer.
 
+The new version of patches should be posted as a separate thread,
+not as a reply to the previous posting. Change log should include a link
+to the previous posting (see :ref:`Changes requested`).
+
 Testing
 -------
 
-- 
2.41.0