Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: palmas: add input supply names

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 03/20/2013 10:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:42:26AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/20/2013 10:38 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:07:17AM -0600, Stephen Warren
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 03/20/2013 06:54 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> 
>>>>> I generally send a patches on single git-send command git 
>>>>> send-emal --to=ldewangan@nvidia.com 0000.patch 0001.patch
> 
>>>> Don't do that; send *.patch. If you don't, then patches 2..n 
>>>> don't end up being "in-reply-to" patch 1, so they won't show
>>>> up as a single email thread.
> 
>>> The two should be equivalent (though the glob is much easier
>>> to type)? The result of the globbing ought to be what Laxman is
>>> typing by hand assuming that he's getting the order correct.
> 
>> If you send *.patch at once, git send-email adds an in-reply-to
>> header to the email which sets up the threading. If you send the
>> patches 1-by-1, this header isn't added, since git send-email
>> doesn't have a clue what message ID it chose for patch 1. Unless
>> you pass the --in-reply-to command-line option, that is.
> 
> Indeed - I think you may have quoted the wrong bit of Laxman's
> mail there?  The bit you're replying to is doing it as a single
> command, though he did talk about doing this in multiple commands
> elsewhere in his mail.

Oh right yes. I'd seen 0000.patch and not that there were multiple
entries in the command-line that listed (I assume) all the files.
Sorry for the noise.