LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Chancellor <>
To: Mark Brown <>
Cc: Cezary Rojewski <>,,,
	Fabio Aiuto <>,
	Jie Yang <>,
	Takashi Iwai <>,
	Pierre-Louis Bossart <>,
	Liam Girdwood <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.15 v3] ASoC: Intel: boards: Fix CONFIG_SND_SOC_SDW_MOCKUP select
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 08:14:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTI71k5EsyTgstkn@MSI.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 11:27:38AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 11:12:18AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > CONFIG_EXPERT, there is a Kconfig warning about unmet dependencies:
> To repeat what I already said in this thread: the reason this will have
> got buried last time is that you sent the prior version in reply to an
> old thread.  This new version has also been sent in reply to an old
> thread which almost had the same effect.  Please stop doing that, and
> also please pay attention to feedback.

Sorry, I was not meaning to ignore feedback. I interpreted "this was
sent in reply..." as "Pierre-Louis's message was sent in reply..." not
"the v2 patch was sent in reply...".

> Please don't send new patches in reply to old patches or serieses, this
> makes it harder for both people and tools to understand what is going
> on - it can bury things in mailboxes and make it difficult to keep track
> of what current patches are, both for the new patches and the old ones.

For the record, the documentation for sending patches has the "Explicit
In-Reply-To headers" section, which frowns on doing this for multi-patch
series but never mentions this for single patches. I have never had a
maintainer complain about me doing this in the over three years that I
have been doing this. It is helpful for me as a developer to see the
review history of a patch at times so keeping them altogether is nice
but if this is going to be a problem, I'll just get in the habit of
providing links to the previous postings on in the
changelog section. Maybe the documentation could be updated to frown
upon adding In-Reply-To headers to new versions of patches period? I can
draft up a patch to clarify that.

Do you want me to resend v3 without an In-Reply-To header or can you
pick it up as is?


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-03 15:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-02 19:03 [PATCH] " Nathan Chancellor
2021-08-02 21:05 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2021-08-02 21:24 ` [PATCH v2] " Nathan Chancellor
2021-09-02 15:02   ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2021-09-02 15:24     ` Mark Brown
2021-09-02 18:12   ` [PATCH for-5.15 v3] " Nathan Chancellor
2021-09-03 10:27     ` Mark Brown
2021-09-03 15:14       ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2021-09-03 16:26         ` Mark Brown
2021-09-03 15:18     ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YTI71k5EsyTgstkn@MSI.localdomain \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH for-5.15 v3] ASoC: Intel: boards: Fix CONFIG_SND_SOC_SDW_MOCKUP select' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).