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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <342dee74-a131-400a-ba2b-32b45ab556e8@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 14:10:52 -0700
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Martin Habets <habetsm.xilinx@...il.com>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to



On 8/24/2023 8:29 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:08:54 +0100 Martin Habets wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 08:49:22AM -0700, 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.  
>>
>> Is this something NIPA could catch?
> 
> I think so, but the whole thing makes me feel bad. I mean, if I was 
> to sit down to write some code I should probably try to hack up 
> my email client to allow force-breaking threads?
> 

Yea if I were to do anything else here it would be figure out how to
make the tooling handle this better somehow rather than trying to
enforce not doing it.

However, I agree recommending avoiding this is good.

Thanks,
Jake