On Jan 2 2008 12:14, Stefan Richter wrote: >There is nothing wrong with a 0/n posting per se. But whenever you >write a 0/n posting, ask yourself: > - Isn't the information I provide here necessary to keep around by > somebody who takes my patch series into his quilt series or into his > source repository? > - Couldn't the information here be useful at a later point in time > when people look into the mainline Linux history? >If "yes" or "maybe yes", then add this information to the changelogs in >the patches. You can then leave the 0/n posting as is, or make it >briefer, or omit it entirely.
Please emit a [0/n] and the [m/n] as a reply so that threading-aware mail readers can collapse and/or use delete-thread-at-a-time feature. If there is no info in [0/n], let it be empty or a one,two-liner brief introduction. >It is never necessary to post a 0/n message, because _everything_ which >could be said in this message can also be said in the i/n messages. >(Things which are not meant for the SCM changelog can be written after a >"---" delimiter line or other patch delimiters.) However, it is >sometimes convenient to repeat or summarize some of the information from >the i/n messages in a 0/n message. Think about convenience of the >_recipients_ though, not about the sender's convenience. And [0/n] sometimes contain a diffstat which gives an approximate line count of how big the patchset actually is. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
