Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 10, 2016, 21:14 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqd1lg498x.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160810193057.s36wfcivlfm3xmh2@x>

Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

>> But submission is less important than review. And for review it is
>> usually better (except gigantic series) to have patch text for review
>> with the review.
>
> Agreed.  However, submission typically requires more work than review,
> because the patch text must remain applicable.  For review, as long as
> the email client you use to respond doesn't do something horrible like
> *re-wrap* the quoted patch text, the result will work as a review.

Yup. That is why we say "please send patch inline; when asked to send it as an attachment, please do so".

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.