On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:56:51AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 09:26:26 CET Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > > On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 00:42:10 CET Leonardo Araujo wrote: > > > > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning: > > > > > > > > CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'? > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++--- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > "Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?" > > > it's not the way patch subjects are created for inclusion in Linux. > > > > I do not see anything wrong with this. What do you think is not > > acceptable? > > My opinion is that the formal construction of a patch is important not less than > the code in it. However it's not that big deal, in this case. But for what my > opinion is worth, having a subject that says what the patch must do and using an > imperative language is quite important. No, the imperative language rule is pointless bureaucracy. Very few of us are English majors and a lot speak English as a second language. Why put artificial barriers in the way? You will lose developers like that. What matters in a commit message is can you understand what the problem is, how it affects users and how are we going to fix it. regards, dan carpenter
