From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 740B1A046B for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:08:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 561B91B970; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:08:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1CF2BAC for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:08:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7711B525; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:08:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=luoG5sbsCmFxXY9m5jMehfE2Sj0iFjnYwc1MWId2hts=; b=T9FCKZJ0EQAS bhBJh/pvuqf+/gNvR0qLyzg99psh1K72+2LliWXp2uR0b54zQ9kADQXtxBywqsj/ zVvD7FUY+RIC14Vy1JrvRcFTRrzennuNMK/jnbhUl1LUFjCYalGicpNsmDkYB8IL 5Cu/WeHqhbFPGhW4Ur5n1rDxU4j8Jo4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=luoG5sbsCmFxXY9m5jMehfE2Sj0iFjnYwc1MWId2h ts=; b=BDbl/G/SW9crzDaBNdQA2cRJk8MwpFNrl8qnc4elDeAPb9IG/s1d+wVzE tqorOwBf109gLJgXITXJNeBSI/UYjtdAtjkJ6G+Si5IH3VNpiU3kBSEjqYrIGpcT kvR6hICckl8hrsZaGcK1jnvesWFr2+Txmns/DPZ87L3PAzwAhCTysa7rdy7giI1f k8JSWC6j4pCqFe9gRj3tJo6bkoPumC9nC80ax1VO93pxCAT0FAeiA7ajughX3t28 /u16aDE2+GhdE5FTp7CtIz94QREXyvN+oBTo6/d2Ac+Gviu/fdB/7PWOw4R7SVT9 o0MkMPTuJDt7Hdubby+6n91t2QPfQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrjeeggdejhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhho mhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 451DA380076; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:08:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: Ferruh Yigit , "Singh, Jasvinder" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:08:50 +0200 Message-ID: <2780646.sNvHgM3eg8@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190722135632.GD289@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20190719141825.101844-2-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> <802ca1df-bfec-0255-bd51-56ceedc47558@intel.com> <20190722135632.GD289@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 00/11] sched: feature enhancements X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 22/07/2019 15:56, Bruce Richardson: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 02:53:04PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > On 7/22/2019 2:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 22/07/2019 15:22, Singh, Jasvinder: > > >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > >>> PS: please make all versions replying to the cover letter of v1. > > >> > > >> For sending new version, followed suggestion from Ferruh by replying to previous version, not the first version. > > > > > > Replying to previous version creates an unneeded indentation. > > > And, as you are replying to first patch (not cover letter), > > > it makes new version in the middle of the previous one. > > > > > > > Ahh, as Jasvinder said, I was always suggesting replying to first mail of the > > previous version. As long as agreed on one, I don't really mind one against other. > > > > What is the rule now, a new version replied to first mail of *first* version? > > I would not use the term "first mail" as that is ambiguous and could imply > the first patch. I always try and reply to the cover letter of the v1. That > keeps things in thread without a new level of indentation each subsequent > version. I agree with Bruce