From: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:27:18 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] Re: send-email: Add --delay for separating emails
Message-ID: <b4087cc50904091027l4656a6adv6a72bad0a747cdc1@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090409161756.GA12910@vidovic>

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nicolas Sebrecht
<nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
>
> The --delay option may have an undesirable side effect. In case of
> non-chained emails, unrelated mails could be insterted between patches
> where *all* MUA would be affected. It's not only true for very high
> volume message mailing-lists (million monkeys receiving...). FMPOV, it's
> worse than all display issues we already know or have with the current
> behaviour.

But it's already impossible to protect against this scenario. In that
situation, the smallest delay possible is desired, so --delay wouldn't
even be used (that is, its value would be zero). However, the transit
delay could never be small enough to guarantee that no other emails
are inserted into the patch series, so the only solution is to chain
them. At this point, we're back to the problem of arrival time, and
hence --delay becomes useful.

:-D