From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com (mail-io0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3129971AB8 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 21:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f182.google.com with SMTP id c21so244135780ioj.1 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:34:07 -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=YQb5sKc9Jf7RjA3GhkH1SriRFd1I+0OW8+efweMwusQ=; b=M3j1jlIXeuVwm+pMVcnKoVHlzK5SGikrw+AKksTPbiBA9ydR7l0HXJJUxhtPBx3GBj r75gtreg2asLnsJPK/HWYGBXPE2jV2qwiyGXoWIJt3wpNXh49IBHul4n7Na01ylzl7MD mAFf0Vra5G2bRRxtM+7yNfYD5XrI1sTk+tURnFYjwR8jNTeNBGNqNjPJuVDb1fAtYVcC 35/xTIV7+M6xDjesUp6kcwbMZs4NtfrJXS8OpO9BRdUDN75KmKye2wL4p5O3vPw4W2Nj N/FcBofSqy5DIywBpfuSvcGboZ+bsBr7nVhoRkWxNW14hgm2F0Uhi6n9Bddu9v0OnWFk 1Cmg== 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=YQb5sKc9Jf7RjA3GhkH1SriRFd1I+0OW8+efweMwusQ=; b=IbaGIi3V3PHQfVRPQaGkdmcHEd8/m4pn4VDfnO2X1FGPFEuBg69mveiH7l2H85DDyJ poLBNLcYNSgnTcSl8wwVrFCRqh6DRMdyMvKHI8Xy0wnheas7ZP/p7JBhLkPt6m9JUHKf V3CN51ABpSfZJcDVNFPKqZczIoF7mFxFRSh66lTY1I/c5ct1ckzDd2NpD3FZoQWxXVGx 5REm4kbtwUkGDiq4ybZPSLpsitZDLEPdsCL+kPvkMW/v1sasOZe25uRHSYBAyaO746ns UfEiDMKedZMb7xE/8J6hK3FTHWOcvuO+TC3dDqsKJ3en1hWIoKAuvppGHRd/QlW96YQ7 n2QQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01S4gth/3uWcaXuSF2WV7Vco3Ng0NKAM5jV+Z2sSQpcJWo21NmgpNyl85iCDJ4Y7wQE X-Received: by 10.107.50.12 with SMTP id y12mr18823721ioy.159.1480368846646; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:34:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8C83A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.200.58]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k130sm9874062ita.20.2016.11.28.13.34.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:34:05 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1480368843.6873.215.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Jose Lamego Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 22:34:03 +0100 In-Reply-To: <967933e7-9f2e-a960-4699-e4e8f2d39e68@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> <1480362425.6873.209.camel@intel.com> <967933e7-9f2e-a960-4699-e4e8f2d39e68@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 21:34:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 14:28 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: > Agree. Please provide feedback about below comments and I will submit a > v3 patch. > > On 11/28/2016 01:47 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 10:23 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: > More than 1 "In-Reply-To" and "References" message headers are in > violation of rfc2822 [1] and may cause that some email-related > applications do not point to the appropriate root message in a > conversation/series. Fixing that makes sense. Just add it as reason and the "why" part is covered. > > 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? The "how" part still isn't clear to me. Perhaps I'm just dumb, but would you bear with me and explain a bit more how changing the sending of the cover letter affects sending of the patches? As it isn't obvious, perhaps even add a comment to the script explaining it. -- 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.