[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Maintainers, please add Message-Id: when merging patches

From: Alex Bennée
Subject: Re: Maintainers, please add Message-Id: when merging patches
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:56:47 +0000
User-agent: mu4e 1.3.6; emacs 28.0.50

Laszlo Ersek <address@hidden> writes:

> On 01/22/20 13:30, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Around 66% of qemu.git commits since v4.1.0 include a Message-Id: tag.  
>>> Hooray!
>>> Message-Id: references the patch email that a commit was merged from.
>>> This information is helpful to anyone wishing to refer back to email
>>> discussions and patch series.
>> So I guess the ones that don't are maintainer originated patches unless
>> you actively rebuild your trees from a posted series?
> I *think* this should not be a huge problem process wise:
> Assuming that a maintainer does not include their own patches in a PULL
> request for Peter until the same patches receive R-b/A-b/T-b feedback
> from other list subscribers, the maintainer will want to rebase the
> patches at least once anyway, in order to pick up those lines.

Oh I always do a re-base as I apply the r-b/t-b tags. But that is
working off my tree and a bunch of references to the emails with the
appropriate tags in them.

So which Message-Id should I use. The first time the patch was posted to
the list or the last time it was?

> And, in the process, the maintainer might as well add in their own
> Message-Id's from the list.
> ... I realize though, that could be more burden in practice than just
> running git-am against the same (known) base commit... One could always
> run git-range-diff in the end, to compare the "re-pick" versus the
> original local branch.

I'm obviously missing out by not using patches but my own Emacs based
tooling. I guess I shall have to see if I can extend it.

> Thanks
> Laszlo

Alex Bennée

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]