On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 09:06:29AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Lukas Wunner <lu...@wunner.de> wrote: > >> For future reference, please consider posting new versions of series as > >> new threads. This one got pretty messy in the end, with so many > >> different versions. > > > > Daniel asked me to submit a patch "in-reply the previous version" in > > <20150922091757.GZ3383@phenom.ffwll.local> and I adhered to that request > > also when sending a new version of an entire series. In that case I'll > > *not* submit in-reply-to in the future, got that. > > You'll probably get a different reply from everyone you ask. ;) > > My rule of thumb is that if you update individual patches (whether in a > series or not), send them in-reply to the previous version. Each patch > in-reply to its preceding version in the series. If you update more than > about half the patches in a series, it's perhaps less confusing to send > a new series with no in-reply-to. (Oh, and this contradicts with the > example in git send-email man page.)
I have the same rule-of-thumb, but probably failed to convey it clearly. Sorry for the confusion. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
