Commenters may not receive new versions of patches via the lists.
Without a directed notification to them they might miss those new
versions.

This is frustrating for the patch developers as they don't receive their
earned Reviewed-by.
It is also frustrating for the commenters, as they might think their
review got ignored or they have to dig up new versions from the archive
manually.

So encourage patch submitters to make sure that all commenters get
notified also when no Reviewed-by was issued yet.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
---
Changes in v2:
- s/reviewer/commenter/ to avoid ambiguity (Christoph)
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230927-docs-cc-reviewer-v1-1-2af46ceb2d3c@weissschuh.net
---
 Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
index efac910e2659..3245b7b38b98 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
@@ -327,6 +327,8 @@ politely and address the problems they have pointed out.  When sending a next
 version, add a ``patch changelog`` to the cover letter or to individual patches
 explaining difference against previous submission (see
 :ref:`the_canonical_patch_format`).
+Notify people that commented on your patch about new versions by adding them to
+the patches CC list.
 
 See Documentation/process/email-clients.rst for recommendations on email
 clients and mailing list etiquette.

---
base-commit: 633b47cb009d09dc8f4ba9cdb3a0ca138809c7c7
change-id: 20230926-docs-cc-reviewer-023b3730af23

Best regards,
-- 
Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>

Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net> writes:

> Commenters may not receive new versions of patches via the lists.
> Without a directed notification to them they might miss those new
> versions.
>
> This is frustrating for the patch developers as they don't receive their
> earned Reviewed-by.
> It is also frustrating for the commenters, as they might think their
> review got ignored or they have to dig up new versions from the archive
> manually.
>
> So encourage patch submitters to make sure that all commenters get
> notified also when no Reviewed-by was issued yet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - s/reviewer/commenter/ to avoid ambiguity (Christoph)
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230927-docs-cc-reviewer-v1-1-2af46ceb2d3c@weissschuh.net
> ---
>  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> index efac910e2659..3245b7b38b98 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> @@ -327,6 +327,8 @@ politely and address the problems they have pointed out.  When sending a next
>  version, add a ``patch changelog`` to the cover letter or to individual patches
>  explaining difference against previous submission (see
>  :ref:`the_canonical_patch_format`).
> +Notify people that commented on your patch about new versions by adding them to
> +the patches CC list.

Applied, thanks.

jon

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Hello Thomas,

Am Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 08:30:03AM +0200 schrieb Thomas Weißschuh:
> Commenters may not receive new versions of patches via the lists.
> Without a directed notification to them they might miss those new
> versions.
> 
> This is frustrating for the patch developers as they don't receive their
> earned Reviewed-by.
> It is also frustrating for the commenters, as they might think their
> review got ignored or they have to dig up new versions from the archive
> manually.
> 
> So encourage patch submitters to make sure that all commenters get
> notified also when no Reviewed-by was issued yet.

Appreciate your suggestion.  Not sure if every commenter would like to
be included in follow up iterations of a patch series, but for the few
things I comment on, I would be interested.

> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - s/reviewer/commenter/ to avoid ambiguity (Christoph)
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230927-docs-cc-reviewer-v1-1-2af46ceb2d3c@weissschuh.net
> ---
>  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> index efac910e2659..3245b7b38b98 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> @@ -327,6 +327,8 @@ politely and address the problems they have pointed out.  When sending a next
>  version, add a ``patch changelog`` to the cover letter or to individual patches
>  explaining difference against previous submission (see
>  :ref:`the_canonical_patch_format`).
> +Notify people that commented on your patch about new versions by adding them to
> +the patches CC list.

Acked-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@thorsis.com>

Greets
Alex

>  
>  See Documentation/process/email-clients.rst for recommendations on email
>  clients and mailing list etiquette.
> 
> ---
> base-commit: 633b47cb009d09dc8f4ba9cdb3a0ca138809c7c7
> change-id: 20230926-docs-cc-reviewer-023b3730af23
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
>