Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] Re: send-email: Add --delay for separating emails

[Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 12:27, Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:17, Nicolas Sebrecht
> <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
>>
>> The --delay option may have an undesirable side effect. In case of
>> non-chained emails, unrelated mails could be insterted between patches
>> where *all* MUA would be affected. It's not only true for very high
>> volume message mailing-lists (million monkeys receiving...). FMPOV, it's
>> worse than all display issues we already know or have with the current
>> behaviour.
>
> But it's already impossible to protect against this scenario. In that
> situation, the smallest delay possible is desired, so --delay wouldn't
> even be used (that is, its value would be zero). However, the transit
> delay could never be small enough to guarantee that no other emails
> are inserted into the patch series, so the only solution is to chain
> them. At this point, we're back to the problem of arrival time, and
> hence --delay becomes useful.

I do agree that --delay could exacerbate the spreading out of patches.