The way the list manages patch submission

Hi,

As a beginner here I have to say it's really surprising the way the list disappears patches sent to the list. Usually when you send an email you expect it to be delivered.

I'm sure you have your reasons for this behavior but I thought I'd comment anyway.

As a suggestion, if the patch won't go to the list for comment perhaps there's a way to send an ack back to the sender to let them know what will happen next?

Regards,

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein

I think it's a matter of the list software isn't sending emails to the original sender, regardless of the setting for that user. The same happened to me with a patch set I sent on Wednesday. They all went to the list, based on looking in the online archive, even though I never got those emails in my own mailbox. I also got a couple of weird bounces ... something about it being a moderated list for about half of the six emails.
Weird.

I see several patches from you over recent days, including the re-submissions, so my guess is the same is happening to you.

Cheers,

a

It seems only to affect patches sent to the list, not regular emails like this one. I don't think it has to do with the client. git send-email --compose sent a patch and a message and I got the message back on the list but not the patch.

Cool. Thanks for the ack.

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein

Hi Karl & Andy,

If you see your email in the archive and/or patchwork (note only patches and comments on patches will make it into patchwork - also that Patchwork will drop patches containing 'funny (non-ASCII)' characters) then the list is processing it correctly.

We are currently looking into a home-brew patchwork replacement to augment how we process patches via the mailing list. Comments are appreciated:

http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/ToolsPatchTracking

emails over, I think, about 100kB need approval before being forwarded to the list. Wolfgang, since these appear to be rather rare, can this limit be dropped, at least for a little while to test the impact?

So do I - big thanks for the documentation updates, they all too often get overlooked.

Regards,

Graeme

Dear Graeme Russ,

I see no reason to drop the limit. Moderation takes place several times per day; nobody ever complained to me that his message got delayed for too long.

I have no diea why there are two people (Karl and Any) appear to have problems with list delivery - I cannot see any such problems. As far as I can tell, all their messages have been properly delivered to the list and the archives. I tend to believe these are local problems on their own end, but without precise error reports I don;t ieen have a clue what to look for.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If all the Chinese simultaneously jumped into the Pacific  off  a  10
foot platform erected 10 feet off their coast, it would cause a tidal
wave that would destroy everything in this country west of Nebraska.

The trouble is getting a patch message back from the list when you send a patch in. For example I sent <[email protected]>
[PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer
The mail logs show the message going out, but nothing ever comes back with that message id.
(Of course I don't see the message id if my
system rejects the inbound message, but why
would it reject just my patches from the list?)

Perhaps it's because git send-email automatically cc-s me, so the list decides not to send the patch back? I've added myself as a cc to this message to see if that matters.

In any case it's not a big deal. It's just, odd.
If you really care you can look at your logs
and watch the above message id come in and
what happens to it.

Regards,

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein

Dear Karl,

Why would you want to get your own messages back? You already know what you sent, don't you?

Yes, and as you can see for example from the list archive at gmane that has been properly deliverd; also your V2 of it:

08/03 "Karl O. Pinc" [U-Boot] [PATCH] README: Add handy kermit primer
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/136913

08/03 "Karl O. Pinc" [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] README: Add handy kermit primer
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/136919

Why should it?

Your registration in the mailing list has the "nodupes" flag set, which is documented as:

Avoid duplicate copies of messages?

When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the mailing list. Select Yes to avoid receiving copies from the mailing list; select No to receive copies.

If the list has member personalized messages enabled, and you elect to receive copies, every copy will have a
X-Mailman-Copy: yes header added to it.

You selected that you don't want dupes, so you should not complain that you don't get dupes.

It is the configuration you selected. If you don't like it, then go to the list page, click on "edit options", and change your settings. Most people prefer it tis way, though.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
When all is said and done, more is said than done.

Dear Wolfgang,

Because I always get all my own messages back, except for patches. Duplicate elimination is different from whether the list sends you back your own messages.

Yes. That was never an issue. (I can see how you might think it is an issue. People say their messages "do not go to the list" because they look in their email inbox and do not see the list sending them the message.)

See above.

Ah, but I didn't "select" this configuration. I got the default configuration without ever knowing what I got.

Really, it's more of a problem with _git_ on my end always cc-ing me. Although duplicate elimination on the list side makes sense it the combination of this default and git's behavior that makes for never-before-seen behavior that leads to questions. After all, how often is it that I cc myself when sending
email to a list? (If ever, I'd bcc.) It's git's cc-ing
that's introducing a new factor and making odd things happen.

Come to think of it, most (all?) of the lists I'm subscribed to have duplicate elimination turned off by default. Now that I think of it
I was also surprised when my conversations with others that cc-ed the list did not show up on the list -- to be precise, _I_ was not able to see them show up on the list by looking at my email inbox. But that didn't really raise alarm bells in the same way that sending patches and then not "seeing" them on the list raises alarms. Patches represent real work and when they seem to disappear it's disconcerting. Because of the moderation delay (maybe?) by the time u-boot messages start showing up in my inbox I've already forgotten about the cc-ed conversation; but patches are memorable.

So perhaps the u-boot list default that has duplicate elimination turned on,
where other lists do not, is factor contributing
to the confusion. I've never had
to think about configuring my list subscriptions.
I send email; the list delivers the email to all it's recipients, including me. The operation is very transparent. When things did not work that way on the u-boot list it raised questions. My very first post was a patch. It took me about a month to realize that the patch was received by the rest of the list and by then I'd already re-sent it.

If I had confusion and Andy had confusion there
must also have been some other people in the past
who didn't speak up who had confusion too.

Anyway, problem solved. We know what's happening, what happened, and why. You can decide if there's any sort of issue that you want to address by frobbing defaults on your end.

I hope this has been more helpful than annoying.

Regards,

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein

P.S. As long as we're on the subject of the list, the moderation delay was initially confusing when sending in my first post. (My first post
was actually 2 emails, sent by
git send-email --compose, so was 2 emails:
a patch and a regular email. The regular email was, after delay, sent back to me by the list, the patch was not.) No getting around the moderation delay, just thought I'd mention it. Perhaps you could alter the list welcome message to note that the list is moderated. This won't help; nobody reads the instructions. :/ But at least you'll have something to point to if anybody complains.

P.P.S. It occurs to me that it might be less confusing if the list default was to not send emails back to the original sender, as well as having duplicate elimination turned on. This seems to me to be
more consistent -- you never get messages you otherwise see. I can't say I like this as a default, I'm just saying it would be a more consistent user interface. It would not violate the principal of least surprise by treating messages potentially seen because of cc differently from messages seen otherwise.

Dear Karl,

This makes no sense - you will get a welcome message only after subscribing, and moderation hol;ds only posting of unsubscribed senders. Once you are subscribed, your messages go through unfiltered (except if they are too big or get caught by the spam filters).

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If you use modules, you pay the price. Sane embedded solutions
running in "tight" environments don't use modules :-)
    -- Benjamin Herrenschmidt in <1258234866.2140.451.camel@pasglop>

Am 04.08.2012 18:55, schrieb Karl O. Pinc:

Some mail-servers have that feature enabled by default too. E.g. cyrus-imapd (called duplicate delivery suppression there). So if you get a mail by cc and from a list, usually the one from list doesn't show up because it is delivered after the cc'ed one.

Regards,

Alexander

FYI. I got the above message twice. Probably because you sent the message To: me and Cc:-ed the list instead of sending the message To: the list and cc:-ing me.

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein

No. I am wrong. I was confused. :-P

Sorry.

Karl <[email protected]>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein