Two successive patches about the same function [Was: Re: message-simplify-subject too coupled with reply (and not extensible)]

["Garreau\, Alexandre" <galex-713@galex-713.eu>]

On 2018-10-28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> I'm less certain about this. It's one of those cases where probably no
> one remembers why it is the way it is, and no one wants to touch it
> because who knows how things might suddenly break. If I were you I
> would report two separate bugs, so that the first had a better chance
> of being accepted.

I’ve a question about patches: a patch mention the original version, as
long as its context, so if I end trying to submit a patch for the same
function, the second will either base on the version patched by the
first, either be based on original function before first patch, and then
won’t it have problem applying after first has been applied?

In our case, the second patch is about simplifying, improving and
factorizing `gnus-simplify-subject', and arrives after the one stripping
the “concat "Re: "”, but still having it in the version of the function
it patches.

Or maybe should I report without a patch tentative? on another hand,
with what I did it’s not that long, and I suppose at worse it’s possible
to ignore the (then incorrect (or rather outdated?)) patch…