Re: Maintainers, please add Message-Id: when merging patches

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 01/22/20 20:07, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:56:47 +0000
> Alex Bennée <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> Laszlo Ersek <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> On 01/22/20 13:30, Alex Bennée wrote:  
>>>>
>>>> Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden> 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 think so as well -- pick the IDs from those messages of yours that
another maintainer would apply with git-am.

(BTW I've had another thought -- git-send-email prints the message IDs
it generates while sending the emails, so one could pick those up with a
git-rebase/reword right after posting, too.)

Thanks,
Laszlo

> 
> [I just add the id right before I send my 'queued' email.]
>