From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linus971@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:11:33 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Block pull request for- 4.11-rc1 To: Jens Axboe Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 List-ID: On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Please pull! Either this pre-merged branch: > > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-4.11/linus-merge-signed > > or > > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-4.11/block-signed > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-4.11/next-signed So normally I'd merge them separately, but since you didn't actually give me explanations for what the two branches were (ie "block-signed does X, next-signed does Y") I didn't feel like I could write a sane merge message for the two branches - so I took the pre-merged one. Which does bring me to my next issue: *your* merge messages suck too. They don't actually talk about what you are merging and why. A merge is a commit, and needs to have a message, unless it's really really obvious (and they seldom are - merges are generally a lot less obvious than most non-merge commits). So just saying Merge branch 'for-4.11/block' into for-4.11/linus-merge Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe is simply not an acceptable merge message. What are you merging, and why? Please. We've been very good at having good commit messages in the kernel. Merges need good commit messages too! Linus