On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 22:08 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 21:55 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 16:33 -0600, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> > > > > First of all, screw you for all of these patches.  Frekin' 80+ emails!
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah, sorry. ;)  I particularly apologize for 'git send-email' failing
> > > > to properly thread the messages for each series under their summaries.
> > > 
> > > Did you invoke 'git send-email' for each series separately?  If no then 
> > > you should have.  If yes then this is definitively a send-email bug.
> > 
> > I did it in one line, assuming that it would work as it did when I ran
> > it by hand.  We both seem to have expected it to have worked better:
> > 
> > for i in $(seq 1 6); do 
> >     git send-email patches/reg$i \
> >             --to=openocd-developm...@lists.berlios.de \
> >             --from...@superlucidity.net \
> >             --in-reply-to=1259100144.20337.4503.ca...@localhost
> > done
> 
> Your usage of --in-reply-to is wrong.  That made all patch series to end 
> up in the same thread.

How could I have done it right?  Of course, this assumes that sending 6
patche series in reply to a top-level summary is desirable.... Anyway,
here is the relevant output from 'git send-email --help':

       --in-reply-to=<identifier>
           Specify the contents of the first In-Reply-To header. Subsequent
           emails will refer to the previous email instead of this if
           --chain-reply-to is set (the default) Only necessary if --compose
           is also set. If --compose is not set, this will be prompted for.

It said the "first" header, darn it!  I trusted the documentation! :)

Cheers,

Zach

_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to