On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:37:07PM +0100, Florian Mickler wrote: > My first reaction to this is, it's silly. Certainly a > subsystem-maintainer is capable of hacking something together that > suits his needs or may just use a good editor to get the job done. > After all, he might want to edit the commit message anyway. Also he has > to have his act together for all non-conforming submitters anyway, > because shurely, telling people to re-edit their patches subject line > is not what one would consider "welcoming to newbies", or whatever it > is kernel subsystem maintainers have to be nowadays *g*... So, my general policy on this is that I tend to push back on patches which don't just work with the toolset (subject lines are just one part of it) to a variable extent depending on who's submitting and what they're submitting. One of the factors is that the more patches are coming from someone the easier I expect their patches to be to work with. The reason this came up is that this is one of the issues with Joe's patches (which are rather frequent) but he is only willing to do things that he can automate. > (MAINTAINERS seems to be the logical place to put this > information.) Indeed. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
