From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754100AbZJERFU (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:05:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753776AbZJERFU (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:05:20 -0400 Received: from hawking.rebel.net.au ([203.20.69.83]:43580 "EHLO hawking.rebel.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753431AbZJERFT (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:05:19 -0400 Message-ID: <4ACA2730.7000006@davidnewall.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:34:48 +1030 From: David Newall User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jayson R. King" CC: LKML , Con Kolivas Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] BFS backport to 2.6.27 References: <4AC9B97B.6070900@jaysonking.com> <4AC9C9EC.7070003@jaysonking.com> <4AC9FEBB.8080009@davidnewall.com> <4ACA188B.1020108@jaysonking.com> In-Reply-To: <4ACA188B.1020108@jaysonking.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jayson R. King wrote: > David Newall wrote: > >> Shouldn't patches be sent as attachments? >> > > Not according to Documentation/SubmittingPatches Yes, I was trying for irony. Mime has been around for many decades and anybody claiming that they can't cope with them is probably very stupid or lying to make some strange point. Anyway, I'm not trying to change the policy, but was only have a snide dig, en passant, at the crufty, old, has-been attitude that it represents.