mirror of
https://git.notmuchmail.org/git/notmuch
synced 2024-12-24 10:24:53 +01:00
90 lines
4.1 KiB
Text
90 lines
4.1 KiB
Text
|
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
|
||
|
|
Subject: Re: rfc: rewrite commit subject line for subsystem maintainer
|
||
|
|
preference tool
|
||
|
|
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:53:35 +0100 (CET)
|
||
|
|
Lines: 43
|
||
|
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1011170150060.7420@pobox.suse.cz>
|
||
|
|
References: <1289848458.16461.150.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101115193407.GK12986@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1289850773.16461.166.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101116104921.GL12986@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101116183707.179964dd@schatten.dmk.lab>
|
||
|
|
<20101116181226.GB26239@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <20101116203522.65240b18@schatten.dmk.lab> <20101116195530.GA7523@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <20101116122102.86e7e0b9.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20101116230126.GB24623@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
|
||
|
|
<20101117014427.41d85b13@stein>
|
||
|
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||
|
|
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
|
||
|
|
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
|
||
|
|
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
|
||
|
|
Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>,
|
||
|
|
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
|
||
|
|
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
|
||
|
|
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
|
||
|
|
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
|
||
|
|
X-From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 17 01:53:55 2010
|
||
|
|
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
|
||
|
|
Envelope-to: glk-linux-kernel-3@lo.gmane.org
|
||
|
|
Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67])
|
||
|
|
by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
|
||
|
|
(envelope-from <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>)
|
||
|
|
id 1PIWHa-0001VG-H4
|
||
|
|
for glk-linux-kernel-3@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:53:54 +0100
|
||
|
|
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
|
||
|
|
id S933245Ab0KQAxi (ORCPT <rfc822;glk-linux-kernel-3@m.gmane.org>);
|
||
|
|
Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:53:38 -0500
|
||
|
|
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45188 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
|
||
|
|
rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
|
||
|
|
id S932265Ab0KQAxh (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
|
||
|
|
Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:53:37 -0500
|
||
|
|
Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.221.2])
|
||
|
|
by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9DD867E2;
|
||
|
|
Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:53:36 +0100 (CET)
|
||
|
|
In-Reply-To: <20101117014427.41d85b13@stein>
|
||
|
|
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23)
|
||
|
|
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
|
||
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||
|
|
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
|
||
|
|
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
|
||
|
|
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1063534>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Stefan Richter wrote:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> > > I don't know what you asked Joe to change, but asking someone to use
|
||
|
|
> > > the documented canonical patch format:
|
||
|
|
> >
|
||
|
|
> > > <quote>
|
||
|
|
> > > The canonical patch subject line is:
|
||
|
|
> >
|
||
|
|
> > > Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase
|
||
|
|
> > > </quote>
|
||
|
|
> >
|
||
|
|
> > > should be fine. And there is no need for printf-ish templates
|
||
|
|
> > > for this in MAINTAINERS either.
|
||
|
|
> >
|
||
|
|
> > That's exactly what I asked him to do. He said he's not willing to use
|
||
|
|
> > anything for "subsystem" which can't be automatically generated.
|
||
|
|
>
|
||
|
|
> Why should we codify our conventions in MAINTAINERS to accommodate the
|
||
|
|
> specific problem of virtually a _single_ patch author?
|
||
|
|
>
|
||
|
|
> Conventions are living and are being adjusted all the time, as code
|
||
|
|
> organization changes, people join and go, projects start and cease.
|
||
|
|
>
|
||
|
|
> Said author please looks the conventions up in the git history. If he
|
||
|
|
> finds that this decelerates his patch generation rate, he can surely
|
||
|
|
> code a script that looks into git for him and suggests plausible
|
||
|
|
> prefixes for his patch titles to him. Or he can collect a kind of
|
||
|
|
> database (a config file) locally for his own use in which he records
|
||
|
|
> conventional prefixes on the go.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Come on guys, this debate is really horribly boring.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Either the maintainer wants the patch. Then he is certainly able to apply
|
||
|
|
it no matter the subject line (I personally am getting a lot of patches
|
||
|
|
which don't follow the format I am using in my tree ... converting
|
||
|
|
Subject: lines is so trivial that I have never felt like bothering anyone
|
||
|
|
about it ... it's basically single condition in a shellscript). Or the
|
||
|
|
maintainer doesn't feel like the patch is worth it, and then the
|
||
|
|
subject-line format really doesn't matter.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--
|
||
|
|
Jiri Kosina
|
||
|
|
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|