Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add strprefix() and fix a bug with it

[Alejandro Colomar <alx+linux-hardening@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3165 bytes --]

Hi Andy,

> Date: 2026-11-05 16:42:43+0200
> From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
>
[...]
> > 
> > We do this in the Linux man-pages, as it helps me keep track of all
> > revisions of a patch set easily in mutt(1), without having to follow
> > links or use more-complex tools like b4(1).
> 
> Exactly the same reason on my side to *not* put everything into a single
> thread!
> 
> > > Don't do this. Each new iteration must be a separate thread. Please use
> > > b4 to manage patch series.
> > 
> > I won't use b4(1); I like bare git-send-email(1) and git-format-patch(1).
> > But yeah, I can send them as separate threads, if that's the preference
> > here.
> 
> Yes, in Linux kernel majority of the maintainers (a bit of speculation,
> I haven't counted, but it feels like this to me) do want separate threads.
> IIO with a huge traffic is one of them, tty/serial IIRC also does because
> it's how Greg's workflow is set up.
> 
> > Out of curiosity, what's the benefit of having separate threads?
> 
> ^^^ See above.
> 
> > (Or the converse question: what's the main problem of using a single
> >  thread?)
> 
> In mutt for tracking I often delete the old email threads when they are
> considered closed to me (or archive, if you wish), I don't want a blast
> from the past for this. It's like starting fresh on each Monday :-)
> 
> > They're morally a continuation of the previous threads, which is why it
> > makes sense to me to have them as subthreads.
> 
> The email thread with big patch-series and discussions looks awful
> in such a setup (my opinion).

Hmmm, I have some two-or-three-years-long threads (with hundreds of
mails) in some GCC patch sets, and I find it very convenient that I can
look at all the revisions in mutt(1), because sometimes I want to look
for a comment that happened in some earlier revision, but I don't
remember in which one, so the single block makes it easy to search and
review the history.

When I receive patches in the man-pages, I also find it very nice to get
new revisions as replies, because it bumps the old subthreads next to
it, and so I can check what I said in earlier revisions, to check that
it has been addressed (I don't necessarily remember what I said in
previous reviews, so a patch claiming to have solved my reviews is not
enough information; I want to compare what I said with what the new
patch says).

I never archive email, but rather rely on unread mail being the
"non-archived" mail, and when it's read, it's as-if-archived to me.
Indeed, the reason is that it allows me tracking the whole thread in the
same maildir, including relies from now, and old messages from two years
ago.  I've been wondering for a long time what people do to be able to
follow old threads with new replies, but I guess the answer is "they
don't".  :)

But I understand your setup, and can solve this.  I'll send email
without In-Reply-To, and then can add it manually by editing my local
copy so that I'm able to keep track of the threads, without affecting
your threads.


Cheers,
Alex

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]