From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-79791-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 92443 invoked by alias); 27 May 2017 11:36:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 92425 invoked by uid 89); 27 May 2017 11:36:14 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=revive, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit
X-HELO: smtp.pacific.net
Subject: Re: Last Responder Wins in Patchwork?
To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>,
 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
References: <3f3c6679-dedc-a684-8f90-854a7428ec5e@pacific.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1611301255370.3647@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
 <f4336d23-eebe-caf9-fbb4-5845dca81390@redhat.com>
Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
From: Rical Jasan <ricaljasan@pacific.net>
Message-ID: <cc75a497-af4e-c811-dd03-568667b0505d@pacific.net>
Date: Sat, 27 May 2017 11:36:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f4336d23-eebe-caf9-fbb4-5845dca81390@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SW-Source: 2017-05/txt/msg00819.txt.bz2

Sorry to revive an old thread, but I finally had time to roam around
some more in patchwork, and have some follow up.

On 11/30/2016 06:03 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 11/30/2016 07:56 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2016, Rical Jasan wrote:
>>> Why does this say I'm the submitter?
>>>
>>> https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/12829/
>>
>> Because the message it is based on is one where you included a patch.  
>> Note the "I've attached the beginnings of how I would approach it" in the 
>> first message shown.

Seems that even text in the message that looks like a diff incurs a
patch in patchwork:

https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/20500/

That's brutal.

> Mark it RFC if that's what is is, and then re-post a new patch
> under a new thread if that's the way you want to go.
> 
> https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Patch%20Review%20Workflow

"Not Applicable" is probably better in both the above cases, I think.
I'll be updating all my noise in the patchwork queue shortly.

Rical