From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: rfc: rewrite commit subject line for subsystem maintainer
 preference tool
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:44:27 +0100
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <20101117014427.41d85b13@stein>
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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
	Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <trivial@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
X-From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 17 01:45:44 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 1PIW9d-0005et-Ft
	for glk-linux-kernel-3@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:45:41 +0100
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933190Ab0KQApU (ORCPT <rfc822;glk-linux-kernel-3@m.gmane.org>);
	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:45:20 -0500
Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:40608 "EHLO
	einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932265Ab0KQApS (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:45:18 -0500
X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de
Received: from stein ([83.221.231.7])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id oAH0iRjV025917
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT);
	Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:44:28 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20101116230126.GB24623@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8
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/1063530>

On Nov 16 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:21:02PM -0800, Randy Dunlap 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.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- =-== =---=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/