Subject: Re: Clarification for the use of additional fields in the message
 body
To: Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251014170.2080@hadrien>
 <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402262129250.2221@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB32E.6090003@users.sourceforge.net>
 <558EB4DE.3080406@users.sourceforge.net> <20150707023103.GA22043@kroah.com>
 <559B6FF8.9010704@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9Nn7LKdqT9E0bykY8jpEc-Ugxn8wby5yLcW+nsx=yG3NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559B85CD.6040200@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9Npqma18pj=ZsxYpCNDCm-AjjXvw61MGKBEKSYvg_LUBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <559BBDD6.7040808@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9O=NgJXOJzQaaA0o_yae+ae1oJa5Kcqmpo-WWBO_xUW+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <559BFB19.2080700@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAGRGNgXTN8AxBNNfie4KvvErOXm3LUyL_QLLWQ6TN_wJgJkD-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <559CCC9D.8050606@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAGRGNgWcHxwjx07A45No8vArXR12JGKcfif1Rvi30PQbJs4SGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559CED4C.1080402@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAGRGNgU1SSUw-97aS0nhFObcMpLPdP3ej9WWNVwN77Fd=ws-bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Chris Park <chris.park@atmel.com>,
	Dean Lee <dean.lee@atmel.com>,
	Johnny Kim <johnny.kim@atmel.com>,
	Rachel Kim <rachel.kim@atmel.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <559D29B9.2080408@users.sourceforge.net> (sfid-20150708_154708_967281_66A4AE57)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 15:46:33 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGRGNgU1SSUw-97aS0nhFObcMpLPdP3ej9WWNVwN77Fd=ws-bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

> Is there truly no way to simplify that process?

I see some software development possibilities which could improve
the communication with high volume mailing lists.


> You should be sending the patches directly with SMTP using git-send-email,

This tool is also fine for the publishing of a lot of patches.


> if you're not, then you're making things overly complicated for yourself.

But I prefer a graphical user interface for my mail handling so far.


> Having a feature doesn't mean that it should be used.

Does any of the "questionable functionality" get occasionally overlooked
a bit too often?

Regards,
Markus