From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCHi v4] git-send-email.perl: make initial In-Reply-To apply only to first email Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:53:35 -0800 Message-ID: <7veiaqfels.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7v62w5hsd4.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <1289573708-18573-1-git-send-email-ospite@studenti.unina.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Matthieu Moy , Jonathan Nieder , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Brandon Casey , Stephen Boyd , Thomas Rast To: Antonio Ospite X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 12 21:54:06 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PH0dH-0003Nf-Cc for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:54:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752127Ab0KLUx6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:53:58 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:50636 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751041Ab0KLUx5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:53:57 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C35135C1; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:54:01 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=flNyGnHxBS1xevQ1NedJvl3Mrns=; b=ahfWJS Mh7U7KBaD0dzthLeYHMfSsGCMqbAp5HbV4tPtqgsbLYS6gZ/RXNwJq4SDZ9M9RCu qRtjlWnNR9iU7ILLCJNBVwiWyiyCiIt/zmdxSU3Qb1WDpLgwrWjgr4vdE2s1TBDl AMU1KagpCcEz44zUHo+bnejZorJ5WmhJKBHEE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=pgisBn78+iWnh3+Lc2PMXE8PSfSv7j29 /n9P0BU7LwhqH95fBxVPQANG32WvVrqjjzxNd8TN7T+vgoZkEl/uFrhBGAPTwmV1 ERBeyzgSa8Y2Kvou55MuvQlJIRE5KxiI9smdUCdyrlXCliJS9OVBpxTTHk0lw1WJ xg8VJWgkFyE= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C2C35BF; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:53:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77C2E35BB; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:53:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <1289573708-18573-1-git-send-email-ospite@studenti.unina.it> (Antonio Ospite's message of "Fri\, 12 Nov 2010 15\:55\:08 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F4EACF64-EE9E-11DF-AF21-B53272ABC92C-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Antonio Ospite writes: > When an initial In-Reply-To is supplied it should apply only to the > first email, second and subsequent messages should behave just according > to the --[no-]chain-reply-to setting; this is also what the man page > says about the --[no-]chain-reply-to option and this is also how the > correspondent git-format-patch option behaves. > > This is the typical behaviour we | > want when we send a series with | [PATCH 0/2] Here is what I did... > cover letter in reply to some | [PATCH 1/2] Clean up and tests > discussion, the new patch series | [PATCH 2/2] Implementation > should appear as a separate subtree | [PATCH v2 0/3] Here is a reroll > in the discussion, look at the v2 | [PATCH v2 1/3] Clean up > series in the illustration on the | [PATCH v2 2/3] New tests > right to see what the new behaviour | [PATCH v2 3/3] Implementation > ensures. | Yuck. It is a common trap to think that everybody already knows what you have been suffering from. It certainly is sufficient to show the output after your patch to convince them that your change is a good thing. IOW, if you do two-column, please do it right ;-). The LHS should show how the output _used to_ look like, so that even people who didn't particulary care (because they never hit the issue) can see why the updated behaviour is desirable.