From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753630Ab0KPUVJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:21:09 -0500 Received: from xenotime.net ([72.52.115.56]:55435 "HELO xenotime.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751970Ab0KPUVI (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:21:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:21:02 -0800 From: Randy Dunlap To: Mark Brown Cc: Florian Mickler , Joe Perches , Jiri Kosina , Andrew Morton , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: rfc: rewrite commit subject line for subsystem maintainer preference tool Message-Id: <20101116122102.86e7e0b9.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20101116195530.GA7523@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <1289845830.16461.149.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101115190738.GF3338@sirena.org.uk> <1289848458.16461.150.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101115193407.GK12986@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1289850773.16461.166.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101116104921.GL12986@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20101116183707.179964dd@schatten.dmk.lab> <20101116181226.GB26239@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <20101116203522.65240b18@schatten.dmk.lab> <20101116195530.GA7523@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.6; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:55:31 +0000 Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 08:35:22PM +0100, Florian Mickler wrote: > > > Hehe, I know that I wouldn't want to hand edit every autogenerated patch > > people throw at me... What about just dropping everything before the > > last "]" or ":" and putting an autogenerated prefix before it in a > > pre-commit hook on your side? > > > That should work most of the time... don't know... maybe other > > It's the most of the time bit that worries me, I'm generally reluctant > to script things like this when the scripts aren't very widely used and > it's a pain to get hooks distributed over all my systems and working for > all the things I need to apply patches for. > > From my point of view my current approach is actually working pretty > well with most submitters, even people doing similar janitorial stuff. I don't know what you asked Joe to change, but asking someone to use the documented canonical patch format: The canonical patch subject line is: Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase should be fine. And there is no need for printf-ish templates for this in MAINTAINERS either. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***