patch protocol question

[Tobin C. Harding]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:12:50AM +0100, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Tobin C. Harding <me at tobin.cc> wrote:
> > I would like to know the correct protocol in order to make the
> > maintainers job as easy as possible please.
> >
> > Once a patch has been reviewed and the review makes good points that
> > mean the patch is invalid/unnecessary what is the protocol from then?
> 
> I usually go for a beer when a patch I sent is not needed(two if my
> patch breaks something). If you agree that your patch is not needed,
> this is the end.
> 
> > Assuming one replies to the reviewer with thanks and acknowledging
> > their points. Is it then protocol to state that you are not going to
> > pursue the patch further? How do maintainers know to not bother any
> > more with a patch?
> 
> There is no universal rule that covers all cases, but in general if a
> maintainer states that a patch is not needed, this is the end. Unless
> someone(can be you) makes a point that clarifies the need for your
> patch. In the later case the discussion will make it clear what to do
> next.
> 
> >
> > Similar question; if the last patch of a patch series is not needed
> > should one resend another version without the last patch or is there
> > an accepted protocol to signal this so that the maintainer only looks
> > at merging the initial patches in the series.
> 
> It is easier for the maintainer to let his/her automation to take care
> of the entire series. So the extra work you are going to have to
> re-send will save the maintainer some work, so resend the series if
> one of the patches are not needed. Exception here is if the maintainer
> asks you to do differently.

Got it.

thanks,
Tobin.