Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:53144 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751041AbbGGHzL (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2015 03:55:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Clarification for the use of additional fields in the message body To: Frans Klaver References: <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB32E.6090003@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB4DE.3080406@users.sourceforge.net> <20150707023103.GA22043@kroah.com> <559B6FF8.9010704@users.sourceforge.net> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Chris Park , Dean Lee , Johnny Kim , Rachel Kim , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Julia Lawall , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <559B85CD.6040200@users.sourceforge.net> (sfid-20150707_095532_625490_A5044452) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 09:54:53 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > The date, as far as I know, is ignored. It is the commit date, > not the authoring date, and once your patch is applied by a maintainer > (i.e. committed), the date gets reset anyway. Thanks for your feedback. > No need to try and preserve it. I find that it might occasionally help to share and keep the record on timestamps about the evolution for an original update suggestion. Regards, Markus