From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14398C4727E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C83522076B for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725837AbgI3QrY (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:47:24 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:56366 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725823AbgI3QrY (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:47:24 -0400 Received: from lwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A51FC60C; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:47:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 10:47:22 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Ingo Rohloff Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] docs: process: Submitting a patch for a single git commit. Message-ID: <20200930104722.54c06f6f@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <20200930180238.1c25692e@ingpc3.intern.lauterbach.com> References: <20191011163358.17667-1-ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com> <20191011112357.7c3863cd@lwn.net> <20200930180238.1c25692e@ingpc3.intern.lauterbach.com> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:02:38 +0200 Ingo Rohloff wrote: > it's been quite a long time, but I really want to try again, > because the last 5 times I tried to send in a patch, > the information I wrote down here is EXACTLY what I needed (5 times...) > > I cleaned up the patch a little bit (only very minor modifications), > but before I send this again, let me try to comment on the original > critique. I'm sorry, but this is far from useful...you're referencing a year-old discussion that has long since been pushed out of my brain. If you have a patch, please send it. If, however, you choose to ignore the feedback you got last time, you're likely to run into the same issues this time around. Thanks, jon