From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:35:03 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/1] docs/website: contribute.txt update with useful tips on patch versioning and patch submission In-Reply-To: References: <1441726084-15422-1-git-send-email-francesco.nwokeka@gmail.com> <1441727239-17284-1-git-send-email-francesco.nwokeka@gmail.com> Message-ID: <55F880F7.1090700@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 15-09-15 16:03, Fabio Porcedda wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Francesco Nwokeka > wrote: [snip] > +You can also add the +--in-reply-to + flag when > +submitting a patch to the mailing list. The id of the mail > +to reply to can be found under the "Message Id" tag on > +http://patchwork.buildroot.org[patchwork]. > +The advantage of *in-reply-to* is that patchwork will automatically mark the > +previous patch as superseded. > + > > > I've sent the "[PATCH v2] barebox: bump to version > 2015.09.0"(http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2015-September/139495.html) > using the --in-reply-to option of format-patch, but patchwork didn't make the v1 > as superseded, I've done something wrong? > > v2: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/517503/ > v1: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/517494/ Weird, that normally should work, I've checked the headers and they look OK... Patchwork isn't perfect about making the link but with in-reply-to I've not seen it go wrong yet. I've now manually marked the v1 as superseded. Regards, Arnout -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF