From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f45.google.com (mail-oi0-f45.google.com [209.85.218.45]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9CFA71AAB for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:47:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b126so163763275oia.2 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:47:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IuEjEOBjn8ZXv7D4CzUTmnLdUpUPMpKp2vo1xYXq5jU=; b=J5Dzb/gbUg8hD/g6m/1gsrqVE6oxaF6+EbP9L22kmNnXFTKClLuSnreAoR5j37XRHC hhb6/9VQHeIIOhlX+Fe0l85vvYWLmCNph+eXYu90tyB0qZNFnmH0nhQgdYzsEKJAZTgm 8hFVSGKlETCuO1Nfjn5RyST/0il/wnEENIEKX0W0EeUC60B+OzcUaqVHu3PuYN3WznqL Lg6+ncP4whuXBT/lgJbY0H0guXZJrc8sieUGR+CSXsLBqqYjJF4mFlvS/BhEH5jyhJ+g OSYp1gRmGnfwrcpJ49Yd6sZCFjLUVR6pgjp/W33xg3N10WHdPrqr2JaagXc85/vOa7o9 yHPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IuEjEOBjn8ZXv7D4CzUTmnLdUpUPMpKp2vo1xYXq5jU=; b=OFzOeWT4YrFmkGqEZMYHvveRFs42pMp14YBPU7PdwwGrgF0je/e6QoSGKP4hfH49Gc SV30OOWdwGodm1bqBdV/PvbZUiUPeDmlBesbs+S1hLWZm+TDIWRbrSe39Z42DLmpuHKC pDQsvb10Q2o90zdYkBGcaTLNIkuEQz3UOp6pygangUHaNQ6a3JeEoZxL9rr1+p5d7+3w QAas35T8r0iTeD/60i1jqiR8TYyfeQb23mDVndBRO5ryFerBE/DQS9eU5wewzUyeklW5 gCBTNKitPEH/bQyVVc87gRWtGWBEuvfc4zQEd4PomF6AtSWCuQbmvp+OGideI2hIB/sw aIvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02h9+FVqBKjSXZSFq9yduabhqQrIs/ucsxKWEDfeAVHZOArMsuPKxEHQFQ+Y2GyNH8t X-Received: by 10.36.66.76 with SMTP id i73mr19789121itb.50.1480362429178; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:47:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8C83A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.200.58]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x74sm9664157ita.22.2016.11.28.11.47.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:47:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1480362425.6873.209.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Jose Lamego Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 20:47:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1480350180-9496-1-git-send-email-jose.a.lamego@linux.intel.com> References: <1480105843-14729-1-git-send-email-jose.a.lamego@linux.intel.com> <1480350180-9496-1-git-send-email-jose.a.lamego@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] scripts.send-pull-request: Avoid multiple chain headers X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:47:09 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 10:23 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: > When creating a patch set with cover letter using the > send-pull-request script, both the "In-Reply-To" and "References" > headers are appended twice in patch 2 and subsequent. The "why" part is missing in the commit header. "Why" is appending those twice a problem? Is it a bug in the script (because it violates some RFC) or is it merely a workaround for a problem in other software (mail programs or Patchwork)? I know that this change is related to the issues that Patchwork has with identifying a patch series, but even with that background knowledge it is not clear why this fix is the right solution. > This change appends only one header pointing to very first patch > in series or to cover letter if available. > > [YOCTO #10718] > > Signed-off-by: Jose Lamego > --- > scripts/send-pull-request | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/send-pull-request b/scripts/send-pull-request > index 575549d..a660c37 100755 > --- a/scripts/send-pull-request > +++ b/scripts/send-pull-request > @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ PATCHES=$(echo $PDIR/*.patch) > if [ $AUTO_CL -eq 1 ]; then > # Send the cover letter to every recipient, both specified as well as > # harvested. Then remove it from the patches list. > - eval "git send-email $GIT_TO $GIT_CC $GIT_EXTRA_CC --confirm=always --no-chain-reply-to --suppress-cc=all $CL" > + eval "git send-email $GIT_TO $GIT_CC $GIT_EXTRA_CC --confirm=always --no-thread --suppress-cc=all $CL" > if [ $? -eq 1 ]; then > echo "ERROR: failed to send cover-letter with automatic recipients." > exit 1 And I don't understand why this proposed change has the described effect. Does changing the threading parameters change the output of "git send-email" and thus indirectly the mail headers of the following patches? -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.