Merging patches

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Stephen Rothwell <sfr at canb.auug.org.au> [2010.02.10.1712 +1300]:
> I am pretty sure patchwork was designed to consider a patch sent
> (even in reply to another patch) as an independent thing ...

That would explain the behaviour I am seeing. I wonder if there's
an automated way to let updated patches mark the preceding one as
superseded?

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
due to lack of interest tomorrow has been cancelled.
 
spamtraps: madduck.bogus at madduck.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/patchwork/attachments/20100211/0f1af6bf/attachment.pgp>