From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B2871A6C for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 22:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2016 14:35:08 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,565,1473145200"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="1074738598" Received: from jalamego-mobl2.zpn.intel.com (HELO [10.219.5.155]) ([10.219.5.155]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2016 14:35:07 -0800 To: Patrick Ohly 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> <1480368843.6873.215.camel@intel.com> From: Jose Lamego Message-ID: Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 16:35:04 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1480368843.6873.215.camel@intel.com> 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 22:35:07 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 89960 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xXrMHiqKxd9dlocUBti3RsvVlwmMHjmX8" --xXrMHiqKxd9dlocUBti3RsvVlwmMHjmX8 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Q1Ws66GHE8j6Lb6p7S44qnH77BrsBX0RR"; protected-headers="v1" From: Jose Lamego To: Patrick Ohly Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V2] scripts.send-pull-request: Avoid multiple chain headers 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> <1480368843.6873.215.camel@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1480368843.6873.215.camel@intel.com> --Q1Ws66GHE8j6Lb6p7S44qnH77BrsBX0RR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/28/2016 03:34 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > 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. >=20 > Fixing that makes sense. Just add it as reason and the "why" part is > covered. >=20 >>> 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? >=20 > The "how" part still isn't clear to me. Perhaps I'm just dumb, but woul= d > you bear with me and explain a bit more how changing the sending of the= > cover letter affects sending of the patches? >=20 The script is duplicating the headers because it contains two individual calls to git-send-email, one for the cover letter (when available) and one for the rest of the series patches, both using the --no-chain-reply option that includes a reference to the first message. What I'm doing here is to include no reference to any root message at the first call, then including a reference at the second call to the very first message in the chain, which is either the cover letter or the patch #1. This change is currently implemented/tested at [2] and complements a change in patchwork [3] that handles messages including repeated headers (created before this change gets implemented). So the comment I would add to patch is: This change appends only one header pointing to very first patch in series or to cover letter if available by calling send-email with thread history option only once, instead of the original twice. [2] patchwork-staging.openembedded.org [3] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2016-November/033200.h= tml > As it isn't obvious, perhaps even add a comment to the script explainin= g > it. >=20 --=20 Jose Lamego | OTC Embedded Platforms & Tools | GDC --Q1Ws66GHE8j6Lb6p7S44qnH77BrsBX0RR-- --xXrMHiqKxd9dlocUBti3RsvVlwmMHjmX8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYPLEcAAoJEFJAtowlSEbn5ZEH/0roW1hbKGuxiU3a6UNnKRmX wJd5kwcVhReLfFeRIvHTvAqaQ41zQ948t8laO+lF2QzNFjNI1mtoDEhSYuD3r5dO 6NLBFWkywalcq4reyYebu3XwAGK2kpRskrzsSIW9LbxKxcwAwW5RUhpQZuCbsq3L 7F8epLTbh26mUJq/1mskvSLzmXE23IdOmGhmCz1d2QIiZ+VScPTU/iaYdBIv4tzG JlA9eWUr2V1ppEOhSTNXHy2J2Q/rLM7oUa310eBzueVpDvvQCYVGFLs6ow48xxF9 ho4hE2eiYb0x8WJsPTBFdvMpDo+A0iynO5YgPuIj5swyYB95YruNWjH8HjXBmzw= =HFeY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xXrMHiqKxd9dlocUBti3RsvVlwmMHjmX8--