On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 10:01:29 +0200 Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In my opinion, naming the tool reporting the issue in the commit message > summary is not beneficial, and I’d prefer to have more detail on the > change in there. The tool could be named/credited in the commit message > body. Hmm, I didn't put a huge patience into that, I accepted similar commits from Nigel on GH, like this one: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git/commit/?id=1b4b73fd535a6487075e98f620454ff2e13b5240 However, he used the exact problem description reported by the tool in commit message. This is not exactly the same style. I may looks like hypocrite, asking for changes from Xiao now. For that reason I'm fine with current style but I doesn't mean that I disagree with Paul. I agree with Paul. Xiao, let me know if you would like to rework descriptions or you would prefer me to pick it in this form. Mariusz
