Hi Rens, thanks for the feedback.
Rens Oliemans <[email protected]> writes: > Take a look at this example: > https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/[email protected]/ > > which was previously classified as a patch, but no longer. > > My reading of Jacob's request is that an attachment might still result in the > thread being marked as a PATCH (unlike /next/), but that the subject line > takes precendence (like /next/). So a combination of the old and new > approaches would make most sense to me. IIUC, your suggestion is that, if the attached patch is well formatted and has [PATCH] in its suject then it should be promoted as a patch? If yes, indeed, I'm fine with adding an exception to capture in-thread patches that are really meant to be applied. > I guess my intuition is that false negatives are worse than false positives, > but perhaps others (who frequent the tracker more than I do) might disagree. I agree that "false negatives are worse than false positives" and that explains the previous behavior, catching as much patches as possible. But it also makes sense to leave room for quick patches that are still visible within bug/request reports, but not promoted as "standalone" patches: let's find the right trade-off here. Thanks! -- Bastien
