On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 11:02:42AM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: > Hi Andreas and Greg, > > Sorry for top posting, but the text is mixed with Andreas' reply. And > I want to confirm with you what to keep/drop in the commit messages. > > Currently, we have following non-sob/rb lines: > 1. Intel-bug-id: > 2. Lustre-commit: > 3. Lustre-change: > 4. one blank line seperating original commit message from the added > lines for kernel commit > 5. one line of comment for upstream change explanation > > I think we all agreed that we will at least keep 1 and 3, with 1 > changed to full URL. That's fine. > So I'd like to confirm with you what to do with > the others. I think both of you have good reasoning about the format > of commit message. But we need to draw a conclusion to move forward, > right? :) > > Greg, since Andreas' last reply was mixed with quotes, I > copied/reformated them bellow so that you can read easier. > > > Lustre-commit: 3141db609d95d379761e3b54899618b4037d38f6 > > > > > > Or this one? > > > > > [Andreas] This is the Lustre git commit hash, so we can track the > commits which have been merged into the kernel tree. Ok, but we don't care at all about that, and neither does the rest of the world, so please don't do it. Numberous groups have tried to do this with other patches, and it's been rejected every time, please don't try to do it again. > > Lustre-change: http://review.whamcloud.com/6154 > > > > > > This one is at least informative, so it can stay, if you really want it > > there, but the others are not relevant to anyone outside of your > > internal development environment, so do not belong in a Linux kernel > > commit message, sorry. > > > > > [Andreas] Per Documentation/SubmittingPatches: "Some people also put > extra tags at the end. They'll just be ignored for now, but you can > do this to mark internal company procedures or just point out some > special detail about the sign-off." Well, I don't accept patches like that, and I really don't know anyone else who does, sorry. The information in a patch has to be relevant to _anyone_ who reads it. So it needs to be public urls only, sorry. > > [updated for upstream kernel submission] > > > > > > What's with the line break and this [] comment? We don't care about > > that. > > > > > [Andreas] Also per SubmittingPatches: > [Andreas] "...it is recommended that you add a line between the last > Signed-off-by header and yours, indicating the nature of your changes. > While there is nothing mandatory about this, it seems like prepending > the description with your mail and/or name, all enclosed in square > brackets, is noticeable enough to make it obvious that you are > responsible for last-minute changes." > > [Andreas] I guess we can remove the obvious ones (minor or no changes > from the original patch), and improve the ones with substantive > changes to be more descriptive. Yes, please do so. Personally, I don't like seeing that in the signed-off-by: area, I'd recommend to put it above them all, in []. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
