netdev - Re: [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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <2e5a15c4-fce3-c944-45b9-1e778ec4178e@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 22:38:34 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to

On 8/23/23 17:49, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> 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.

For my setup it is also annoying.

(CC IWL + BCC to our pre-IWL list.)

> 
> 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
>   -------
>