From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f49.google.com (mail-pb0-f49.google.com [209.85.160.49]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D5C6B005C for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:57:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f49.google.com with SMTP id jt11so11364609pbb.22 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id uc7si1732982pbc.389.2014.04.16.15.57.32 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:57:30 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: 0/N patch emails - to use or not to use? Message-Id: <20140416155730.b2dc1a551307f736438a85d7@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dan Streetman Cc: Linux-MM On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 17:23:31 -0400 Dan Streetman wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I noticed in your The Perfect Patch doc: > http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/stuff/tpp.txt > Section 6b says you don't like 0/N patch series description-only > emails. Is that still true? Because it seems the majority of patch > series do include a 0/N descriptive email... hm, I think what I said about git there isn't true - merge commits can contain changelogs. Whatever. 0/n is OK and is more email-reader-friendly. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org