On 05/09/16 14:19, Russell Currey wrote:
In testing v2 I found a weird issue I didn't find before.
If you send a new series in reply to the cover letter of a previous series, it
appends the patches to the previous series. This is rather confusing as you
would think any patches sent in reply to a cover letter would belong to that
series, but they clearly should be treated differently in some cases, as you can
see in the screenshot below:
https://i.imgur.com/8Yi9IjR.png
Or in reply to patch 1 of the initial series - the one in your
screenshot doesn't have a cover letter.
Maybe use a reset in numbering? This would be harder to parse if both series
had the same number of patches, I'm imagining something like the following:
- [1/3] patch sent in reply to cover letter, new series (#1)
- [2/3] patch sent in reply to cover letter, append to #1
- [3/3] patch sent in reply to cover letter, append to #1
- [1/3] patch sent in reply to cover letter, new series (#2)
- [2/3] patch sent in reply to cover letter:
- see that series #2 doesn't have a 2/3
- see that the date of the patch means it's probably for series #2
- append to series #2
- [3/3] is the same as above.
This is the sanest approach I think. For each 1/N patch, create a new
series.
--
Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra
andrew.donnel...@au1.ibm.com IBM Australia Limited
_______________________________________________
Patchwork mailing list
Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
