On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:00 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > > > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/. My own > > > > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local > > > > quirks" out of existence. The evidence from this brief discussion suggests > > > > that this might indeed happen. > > > > > > I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating. Everyone just > > > insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault > > > for not reading it. It's like those EULA things where there is more > > > text than anyone can physically read in a life time. > > > > Yes, agreed. > > > > > And the documentation doesn't help. For example, I knew people's rules > > > about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget. I say that if you > > > can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really > > > care that strongly. > > > > If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email > > subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO. E.g., > > E: NuBus > > +1 > > Better make this a regex to deal with (net|net-next). > > We could probably script populating MAINTAINERS with this using how it > is done manually: git log --oneline <dir> I made a similar proposal nearly a decade ago to add a grammar to MAINTAINERS sections for patch subject prefixes. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop/
