From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:13:11 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/7]Timer: Simplify API In-Reply-To: <4E215370.2090203@gmail.com> References: <1309261269-4363-1-git-send-email-graeme.russ@gmail.com> <1310732140-5174-1-git-send-email-graeme.russ@gmail.com> <4E203BB8.80003@gmail.com> <4E214D97.2000009@aribaud.net> <4E215370.2090203@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4E215627.5000203@aribaud.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Le 16/07/2011 11:01, Graeme Russ a ?crit : > Hi Albert, > > On 16/07/11 18:36, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >> Hi Greame, >> >> Le 15/07/2011 15:08, Graeme Russ a ?crit : >> >>> Oh dear, it looks like Patchwork does not honour 'in-reply-to'. It has >>> created new patches rather than updating the existing ones :( >> >> I'm not sure patchwork is supposed to honor the in-reply between patch >> versions. BTBW, is there a rationale or other documentation on the behavior >> of patchwork somewhere? > > I should! - The whole point of me painstakingly getting the in-reply-to > correct for each individual patch was so they would track correctly > everywhere (inbox, list archive, patchwork). Oh Well Two out of three ain't bad. :) > Regards, > > Graeme Amicalement, -- Albert.