From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:15:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from ditditdahdahdah-dahdahdahditdit.dl5rb.org.uk ([217.169.26.28]:15032 "EHLO ditditdahdahdah-dahdahdahditdit.dl5rb.org.uk") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20023505AbYGSHPF (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:15:05 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by ditditdahdahdah-dahdahdahditdit.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m6J7F2Dl019976; Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:15:02 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m6J7F2if019969; Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:15:02 +0100 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:15:02 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Martin Gebert Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: HOWTO submit patches using WebMail - Help appreciated? Message-ID: <20080719071502.GB7558@linux-mips.org> References: <64660ef00807171259l55f85380l47cfdc7574f84099@mail.gmail.com> <200807181528.41119.brian.foster@innova-card.com> <20080718143913.GB25491@linux-mips.org> <4880AD07.2070509@alpha-bit.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4880AD07.2070509@alpha-bit.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 19900 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Martin Gebert wrote: >> I'd like to remind people of the wiki page on this topic at >> >> http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/Mailing-patches >> >> It's not been updated in a while and doesn't cover all clients or >> possible solutions so feel free to update it. >> > Which brings me to a question I've been wondering for some days now: Is > the [PATCH] prefix in the subject mandatory for a patch proposal being > noticed by the maintainers? That's simply a question of working style and mail volume of the maintainer. In the past I used to miss patches that were not sent to me directly at times. I solved that by filtering for patches using procmail. But that scheme also has its shortcomings; it would miss patches being sent in too creative MIME encodings but people aren't supposed to do that anyway. Ralf