Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] fbcon: use the cursor blink interval provided by vt

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2000 bytes --]

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 07:32:05AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 01:49:58PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:33:42PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Friday 22 May 2015 12:00:03 Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Remember, if I have to hand-edit, or do something special with your
> > > > > patch, I will not do it, you need to do it correctly to make
> > > > > maintainer's lives easier, not harder, given that maintainers are the
> > > > > limited resouce, not developers.
> > > > 
> > > > I understand. I'll make a mental note to never send you patches as
> > > > attachment again.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Better make that a general rule. My workflow is different from Greg's
> > > but also doesn't cope well with attachments. A lot of people in turn
> > > have problems quoting from an attachment when replying to the patch,
> > > which happens to work for me.
> > 
> > Okay. Any hints on how to simplify sending out such patches with the
> > same list of recipients? I find it very annoying to have to manually
> > copy each recipient into the git send-email command-line, but I don't
> > know of a better way to do it. Replying to an email from the MUA will
> > at least do that automatically.
> 
> Reply from the MUA and then just put the patch in the email body.  If
> you have a good MUA it should be trivial to do[1]
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 
> 1) mutt drops you to your editor, and then you can just read in the
>    patch file directly to that buffer.

Indeed, that should work. As I understand it, I wouldn't even have to
further edit the email (except strip the reply) because git am prefers
headers in the patch to headers in the message (it certainly does that
for From:, so I suspect it would do it for Date: and Subject: as well).
Or if that doesn't work, Arnd's suggestion to use a scissors line is a
good alternative as well.

Thanks guys for the suggestions,
Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]