Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add strprefix() and fix a bug with it

[Alejandro Colomar <alx+linux-hardening@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1287 bytes --]

Hi Bart,

> Date: 2026-11-05 15:01:22+0100
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>
>
[...]
> 
> I have no idea what causes it but I'm getting so many patches lately
> that are subsequent iterations of a series sent with In-Reply-To: header
> pointing to a previous thread.

I don't know what others do, but in my case it's a conscious manual
action.  I use --in-reply-to in git-format-patch(1) to make all
revisions of patch sets be descendants of the cover letter of v1.

We do this in the Linux man-pages, as it helps me keep track of all
revisions of a patch set easily in mutt(1), without having to follow
links or use more-complex tools like b4(1).

> Don't do this. Each new iteration must be a separate thread. Please use
> b4 to manage patch series.

I won't use b4(1); I like bare git-send-email(1) and git-format-patch(1).
But yeah, I can send them as separate threads, if that's the preference
here.

Out of curiosity, what's the benefit of having separate threads?
(Or the converse question: what's the main problem of using a single
 thread?)
They're morally a continuation of the previous threads, which is why it
makes sense to me to have them as subthreads.


Cheers,
Alex

> 
> Bart

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]