Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Documentation/email-clients.txt: discuss In-Reply-To | From | Chris Metcalf <> | Date | Thu, 5 Nov 2015 14:11:48 -0500 |
| |
On 11/05/2015 01:31 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:13:01 -0400 > Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com> wrote: > >> +When manually adding In-Reply-To: headers to a patch (e.g., using `git >> +send email`), use common sense to associate the patch with previous >> +relevant discussion, e.g. link a bug fix to the email with the bug report. >> +For a multi-patch series, it is generally best to avoid using >> +In-Reply-To: to link to older versions of the series. This way >> +multiple versions of the patch don't become an unmanageable forest of >> +references in email clients. If a link is helpful, you can use an >> +"http://lkml.kernel.org/r/MESSAGEID" URL (e.g., in the cover email >> +text) to link to an earlier version of the patch series. > So this is sitting in my docs folder waiting to see if anybody else had > anything to say. Nope. I guess I'm not opposed to this addition, but > I'm not quite sure what problem is being solved. Is there a plague of > inappropriate hand-crafted In-Reply-To headers out there that I've not > seen?
The "git help send-email" documentation for "--in-reply-to" suggests building hand-crafted In-Reply-To headers this way for subsequent versions of patch series. This paragraph is intended to suggest that's a bad idea.
> Beyond that, this seems like advice that is better put into > SubmittingPatches if we really want it.
That was my original thought, but Peter suggested email-clients.txt:
lkml.kernel.org/r/20151023090459.GW17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net
-- Chris Metcalf, EZChip Semiconductor http://www.ezchip.com
| |