On 2020-01-16 11:38, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > Hi Jean, Peter, > > thanks both for your reviews. > > On 16/01/20 10:49, Jean Delvare wrote: >> On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 08:49:05 +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote: >>> Some of the section names are not very clear. Reading those names in the >>> index.rst page does not help much in grasping what the content is supposed >>> to be. >>> >>> Rename those sections to clarify their content, especially when reading >>> the index page. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> Note: here checkpatch complains: >>> >>> WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1 >>> >>> Thas's because those files have no license line. I would gladly add a >>> proper license line, but what it the correct license here? Should I ask the >>> authors? GPLv2-only as the kernel default? >>> >>> I'd appreciate a guidance here, thanks in advance. >> >> I don't think we need a license for such documentation files, so I >> would just ignore checkpatch. > > That's OK for me. > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/i2c/summary.rst b/Documentation/i2c/summary.rst >>> index fc69d9567d9d..ae3bbb9fd8f1 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/i2c/summary.rst >>> +++ b/Documentation/i2c/summary.rst >>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ >>> -============= >>> -I2C and SMBus >>> -============= >>> +============================== >>> +Introductions to I2C and SMBus >>> +============================== >> >> I would use "Introduction", singular. > > Me too! Fix queued for v2. > > Peter, I assume I can keep your Acked-by in v2 with this small change. That's fine. Cheers, Peter
