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: 1375 bytes --]

Hi Bartosz,

> Date: 2026-11-05 16:00:59+0100
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>
>
[...]
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> 
> Yes. It's also the preference mentioned in the kernel documentation for
> multi-patch series.

Ok.

> > 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?)
> 
> I may mark a thread in mutt as "done" for whatever reason and then all I
> see is a reply under something I've already processed so I may as well
> skip it. On the other hand: a new thread gets my full attention.
> 
> Such sub-threads also can confuse tools like b4 that maintainer use to
> queue patches.

Thanks!

> > They're morally a continuation of the previous threads, which is why it
> > makes sense to me to have them as subthreads.
> > 
> 
> That's what change-id is for in b4 tracking. That's also what the
> changelog should contain: links to previous versions.

This always felt to me a bad workaround for not using proper threads,
but I'll accomodate my patch sets, anyway.  Thanks!


Cheers,
Alex

[...]

> 
> Thanks,
> Bartosz

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

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