also sprach martin f krafft <madd...@madduck.net> [2010.02.10.1617 +1300]: > If someone replies to a patch thread with a broken mailer, and an > updated patch is sent without In-Reply-To, Patchwork ends up > creating two patches for it. I could mark the former superseded, but > that means that all the discussion would be gone too.
In fact, it seems that Patchwork sometimes just screws up. http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/2010/001439.html was sent in direct reply to http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/2010/001438.html, but Patchwork still generated http://patchwork.madduck.net/patch/346/ and http://patchwork.madduck.net/patch/347/. Mbox with the two messages attached. What's wrong with that? -- martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/ "she is absolutely inadmissible into society. many a woman has a past, but I am told that she has at least a dozen, and that they all fit." -- oscar wilde spamtraps: madduck.bo...@madduck.net
pw.mbox.gz
Description: Binary data
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
