Am 23.03.22 um 15:00 schrieb Daniel Stone:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 at 08:19, Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 23.03.22 um 09:10 schrieb Paul Menzel:
Sorry, I disagree. The motivation needs to be part of the commit
message. For example see recent discussion on the LWN article
*Donenfeld: Random number generator enhancements for Linux 5.17 and
5.18* [1].
How much the commit message should be extended, I do not know, but the
current state is insufficient (too terse).
Well the key point is it's not about you to judge that.
If you want to complain about the commit message then come to me with
that and don't request information which isn't supposed to be publicly
available.
So to make it clear: The information is intentionally hold back and not
made public.
In that case, the code isn't suitable to be merged into upstream
trees; it can be resubmitted when it can be explained.
Well what Paul is requesting here are business information, not
technical information.
In other words we perfectly explained why it is technically necessary
already which is sufficient.
Regards,
Christian.
Cheers,
Daniel
