Merging patches

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Jeremy Kerr <jk at ozlabs.org> [2010.02.11.1659 +1300]:
> The last point is the hard bit, so I'd like any ideas you have on
> exposing these relations. I was thinking of adding a "related
> patches" list to the patch page (or a link to the set of related
> patches on a separate page), grouped by relation type. This will
> let the maintainer quickly grab all patches in one series (without
> needing to create a bundle), or see that a patch has an update.

Yes, that sounds nice. It would still be helpful if related patches
would show up as such in the patch list too.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
be careful of reading health books -- you might die of a misprint.
                                                         -- mark twain
 
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/20100211/2f08a871/attachment.pgp>