Re: Submitting multiple patches (was: Re: [PATCH] Fix ERR_EXIT behavior in function calls and "always" statements)

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:58 PM Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Bart Schaefer wrote on Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 08:11:02 -0800:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 1:44 AM Philippe Altherr
> > <philippe.altherr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> I'd also prefer to post all your patches at once because you attached
> > >> them all to the same zsh-workers article.  Convention has been that a
> > >> series of patches should be sent as a series of articles.
>
> I don't think we should insist on this.

I don't think we should insist on this either, but I also don't think
that, having posted them all in one email in the first place, we need
to have them reposted now, unless something about them is going to
change.

> I'd rather ask people to send one message with N attachments, numbered
> as Philippe did in workers/51001, than ask people to send N separate
> mails, in which case they might send nothing at all.

That's fine.  The ONLY issue with Philippe's message, if there is any
problem with it at all, is that two of the patches overlapped on one
of the files, such that one backed out a change and then another put
that same change back again.  I'd just as soon pretend that was all
one patch consisting only of the independent parts of the two, and
assigned only a single -workers article number.

> Besides, I'd like to enourage submitters to split their patches if in
> doubt, since it's easier to combine patches ("42 + 43: foo") than to
> split them ("42 (in part): foo").  So, I'd like to make it easier to
> send multiple related diffs.

This is perfectly OK.