From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7023E2968 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:04:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from userp2130.oracle.com (userp2130.oracle.com [156.151.31.86]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17A0F8B8 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:04:42 +0000 (UTC) To: Greg Kroah-Hartman From: "Martin K. Petersen" References: <20190827134836.GB25038@kroah.com> <20190827153344.GC534@kroah.com> <20190827195351.GA30710@kroah.com> <20190828090837.GA31704@kroah.com> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 06:04:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20190828090837.GA31704@kroah.com> (Greg Kroah-Hartman's message of "Wed, 28 Aug 2019 11:08:37 +0200") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Joel Fernandes , Barret Rhoden , ksummit , Jonathan Nieder , Tomasz Figa , Han-Wen Nienhuys , Theodore Tso , David Rientjes , Dmitry Torokhov , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Greg, > How about this, when sending a v2, you have it be in response to the > v1 patch? Same for v3, have it be in response for the v2 one. And so > on. I spend a ton of time tracking older versions of series (subjects often change). However, requiring proper follow-up headers is yet another thing for me to manually police. Maybe we could add a line of defense and make patchwork complain if somebody posts a -vN without a suitable --in-reply-to? -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering