On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Laurentiu Palcu wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

> > No, please don't - you're missing the point.  The point is that now Lee
> > has applied the other patch you're not sending two patches any more,
> > you're sending a single patch.  This isn't patch 1/2, it's just a single
> > patch by itself now.

> All I did was send new revisions of the 1/2 patch using the
> --in-reply-to option of git-send-email, with the message-id of the
> original version. I used to do this for other projects I contributed to,
> so I didn't have to re-send the entire series for just one patch that

The whole point is that you're not sending a series, you're just sending
one patch.

> needs to be changed. Mail clients, at least the ones I use (mutt,
> evolution), order the mails nicely and you have all the history in one
> thread. So, one can see the cover letter of the series and the other
> original patches in the series, together with the new revisions of the
> changed patch. Of course, if more patches needed change, I would re-send a new
> series.

Definitely do *not* do this, it makes the thread very hard to follow if
there are multiple versions - you end up with multiple versions of
various patches scattered through the thread and it can be very unclear
which versions are current.  If there's a lot of traffic things get
hidden way back when the original submission happened.

Fortunately I've deleted old parts of the thread so I didn't notice you
were doing this.

> So, Mark, can you please instruct me (a link to a page explaining the
> workflow would be fine too) what is the exact workflow you are/were
> expecting?

The patch submission workflow is covered in SubmittingPatches.