On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:56:47 +0000 Alex Bennée <[email protected]> wrote:
> Laszlo Ersek <[email protected]> writes: > > > On 01/22/20 13:30, Alex Bennée wrote: > >> > >> Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >>> Around 66% of qemu.git commits since v4.1.0 include a Message-Id: tag. > >>> Hooray! > >>> > >>> Message-Id: references the patch email that a commit was merged from. > >>> This information is helpful to anyone wishing to refer back to email > >>> discussions and patch series. > >> > >> So I guess the ones that don't are maintainer originated patches unless > >> you actively rebuild your trees from a posted series? > > > > I *think* this should not be a huge problem process wise: > > > > Assuming that a maintainer does not include their own patches in a PULL > > request for Peter until the same patches receive R-b/A-b/T-b feedback > > from other list subscribers, the maintainer will want to rebase the > > patches at least once anyway, in order to pick up those lines. > > Oh I always do a re-base as I apply the r-b/t-b tags. But that is > working off my tree and a bunch of references to the emails with the > appropriate tags in them. > > So which Message-Id should I use. The first time the patch was posted to > the list or the last time it was? >From the last one? I mean, I'll pick the last incarnation if I apply someone else's patches, as well? [I just add the id right before I send my 'queued' email.]
