Re: [PATCH 00/28] clean-ups of static functions and returns

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 14, 2006, 21:22 UTC
Message-ID: <ebqphe$1ga$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608142257130.28360@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, David Rientjes wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
>> > Could you please make description of patch series email to be parent
>> > (ancestor) of all patches emails, i.e. for patches either to be 
>> > chain-replied to introduction email, or all be replies to introduction
>> > email.
>> > 
>> > It makes for easier reading/viewing/applying/ignoring the series.
>> > 
>> 
>> Sure, but you might also want to include this request explicitly in 
>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
> 
> Well... there are people (like yours truly), who still hack there mails in 
> pine, and who do not use git-send-email (I had too many problems with 
> Perl, and git-send-email _is_ in Perl)... For me, it would be an undue 
> burden.

I also not always use git-send-email (because of the box connection to the net); mu latest series of patches was send using KMail; still it is not that hard to send patches as reply to introductory letter, or chain-replied; just reply-all (without quoting) from your "sent" folder.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git