Re: Kernel SCM saga..

Daniel Phillips
2005-04-07T16:59:52Z

On Thursday 07 April 2005 11:10, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Do you have it automated to the point where processing emailed patches
> > involves little more overhead than doing a bk pull?
>
> It's more overhead, but not a lot. Especially nice numbered sequences like
> Andrew sends (where I don't have to manually try to get the dependencies
> right by trying to figure them out and hope I'm right, but instead just
> sort by Subject: line)...

Hi Linus,

In that case, a nice refinement is to put the sequence number at the end of
the subject line so patch sequences don't interleave:

Subject: [PATCH] Unbork OOM Killer (1 of 3)
Subject: [PATCH] Unbork OOM Killer (2 of 3)
Subject: [PATCH] Unbork OOM Killer (3 of 3)
Subject: [PATCH] Unbork OOM Killer (v2, 1 of 3)
Subject: [PATCH] Unbork OOM Killer (v2, 2 of 3)
...

Regards,

Daniel