Re: [RFC][PATCH] update SubmittingPatches to clarify attachmentpolicy

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Wed, 4 May 2005, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2005, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > Plus, a plain/text attachment message saved to a file can go
> > into 'patch' the same way that an inline one can.
> 
> The problem is replying to an attachment.  The reason why having
> the patch in the main mail body is good is that it gets quoted
> by the email software and you can easily reply to individual
> parts of the patch.

Indeed. `perfect' patches as attachments are fine. Maybe that's why some people
testified they never got complaints about their attached patches :-)

But as soon as you have to point out some comments, replying takes a lot more
time (save attachment, load it in editor, prepend every line with `> ', ...),
and may lead to maintainer burn-out.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/