From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 09:05:06 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Changes to U-Boot Development Process In-Reply-To: <200701191119.36122.sr@denx.de> References: <20070119100507.86C06352B86@atlas.denx.de> <200701191119.36122.sr@denx.de> Message-ID: <45B0DE22.7020604@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Stefan Roese wrote: > It would have been a lot easier _if_ I could have reviewed the patch in my MUA > context. At least this is my working experience. It is always a hassle for me > to get the quoted code ("> ") back to the list when the original mail is not > inlined. I agree with this 100%. >> Also, there is always the possibility to split a patch. >> >> Ummm... is there a size limit on other mailing lists - say on lkml or >> linuxppc-dev? > > I would be very interested how this is handled in other lists too. u-boot-users is the only mailing list I've encountered that has an (in my opinion) unreasonably low limit. That's why I suggested increasing the limit to 100KB. One person in Freescale once made a patch that was over 400KB, and we asked him to rewrite it because he included multiple types of changes into one patch. Even with the changes, the 40KB limit was a real problem, but 100KB would have made things a lot easier.