On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:16:34AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote: > > It's also much easier to run git-send-email HEAD^^^, rather than running > > it three separate times, let alone if it's a 20 patch series. > > Exactly. And I'm using b4 which would have forced me to create a separate > branch for each of the patches to track. So I was keeping them around in > a single branch to let 0day run after the merge window. Then I forgot > about the idea of splitting them because b4 had it all packaged up nice! > > > > > I wonder if we could come up with some convention to indicate that a > > series is made up of independent patches, and maintainers are free to > > pick them individually - but still sent as a single series. > > Maybe. But perhaps b4 could have a send option which would split them > out? I'll see about adding an option to b4 but I've Cc'ed Konstantin as > well for the idea.
Yes, I plan to introduce the concept of "bundles" in addition to "series". The distinction is that when you send a bundle, each patch is sent as individual submission and we generate the change-id for each patch. It's a bit more work to send a v2 of some patch (you have to do a "prep -n --from-thread <msgid>"), but it's not insurmountable and should help with queuing up individual patches for sending post merge-window, like in your case. -K
