From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB90DC433FE for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:09:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232347AbiC2FKp (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:10:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56208 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232292AbiC2FKc (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:10:32 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F818636B; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5093B815AA; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:08:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30E74C34100; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:08:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648530528; bh=vdjnHae9b0yzMsExMtKNC+WLL55dm1Lg2N7VoIhWL24=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=W8Mz5RkARNFo3A/b3V1DEMDphv1PPEJnbGTyOFSJJfsXF5c+vVCqso3pE2qPfU+G4 TaIrE7HN480TEesVxx3IOWqMRhlE1Tpio3nSK8hYEDfpSomBYCRLwbyoJXniploFtY 8gdKvoD6g5zLYFpMpUZffzvw7CqSYdabpUI3skU6arJGbMA7sy6ZlCZlyhoQ8ich8N 9EBFwBmb9itGGnpf43FDNUrc6o/afgwF2TlFASSmv2Gp5fw+cBIBFHe3a0gsuvgsnS VgWaJz3lmgD7IZDcMLXvIDJ/k7OrXSVtU9KHbLP41pabcdUeQZhSZd5jHHqxM+exY5 gKhaibueVaZ+Q== From: Jakub Kicinski To: davem@davemloft.net Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, f.fainelli@gmail.com, Jakub Kicinski Subject: [PATCH net v2 08/14] docs: netdev: rephrase the 'should I update patchwork' question Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:08:24 -0700 Message-Id: <20220329050830.2755213-9-kuba@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20220329050830.2755213-1-kuba@kernel.org> References: <20220329050830.2755213-1-kuba@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Make the question shorter and adjust the start of the answer accordingly. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski --- Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst index 00ac300ebe6a..9c455d08510d 100644 --- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst +++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst @@ -125,9 +125,11 @@ Asking the maintainer for status updates on your patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the bottom of the priority list. -I submitted multiple versions of the patch series. Should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these patch series? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave +Should I directly update patchwork state of my own patches? +----------------------------------------------------------- +It may be tempting to help the maintainers and update the state of your +own patches when you post a new version or spot a bug. Please do not do that. +Interfering with the patch status on patchwork will only cause confusion. Leave it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer will reply and ask what should be done. -- 2.34.1