Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

[Marek Vasut]

Dear Shawn Guo,

> On 17 August 2012 10:57, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > Thanks ... still, is there some key for those tags? Or do you invent them
> > at random and then let people guess what's right? Some git grep on
> > Documentation directory gets me nothing.
> 
> There is no official document for this.

Hm, maybe such document can be introduced?

> But generally, each subsystem
> has a convention on the subject prefix, so that the output of git
> commands like git pull, git shortlog looks consistent on the patch
> subject, and more importantly people can easily know subsystem the
> patch touches.
> 
> The convention for patches touching arch/arm is "ARM: ".
> 
> Regards,
> Shawn

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 19/08/12 16:30, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Shawn Guo,
>
>> On 17 August 2012 10:57, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
>>> Thanks ... still, is there some key for those tags? Or do you invent them
>>> at random and then let people guess what's right? Some git grep on
>>> Documentation directory gets me nothing.
>>
>> There is no official document for this.
>
> Hm, maybe such document can be introduced?
Sounds like a voluteer ;) More seriously I suspect it would never get
updated or be correct in the first place. It would be a pile of grief
for whoever was looking after it.

Mostly these prefixes are an excuse for grumpy maintainers to moan
at people :)
>
>> But generally, each subsystem
>> has a convention on the subject prefix, so that the output of git
>> commands like git pull, git shortlog looks consistent on the patch
>> subject, and more importantly people can easily know subsystem the
>> patch touches.
>>
>> The convention for patches touching arch/arm is "ARM: ".
>>
>> Regards,
>> Shawn
>
> Best regards,
> Marek Vasut
>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

[Shawn Guo]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:29:23AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> Mostly these prefixes are an excuse for grumpy maintainers to moan
> at people :)

Yeah, I have to become grumpy when my comment gets ignored and I have
to make it right (for several times) to avoid my upstream moaning at me.

Is it so hard?  You are not creating a new subsystem but just patching
an existing file.  A "git log" on the file simply shows you how to do it.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn

Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 20/08/12 08:52, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:29:23AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> Mostly these prefixes are an excuse for grumpy maintainers to moan
>> at people :)
>
> Yeah, I have to become grumpy when my comment gets ignored and I have
> to make it right (for several times) to avoid my upstream moaning at me.
Not at all. My upstream has never moaned at me about it, but I still 
like to moan about it myself ;)
>
> Is it so hard?  You are not creating a new subsystem but just patching
> an existing file.  A "git log" on the file simply shows you how to do it
>
Indeed. A file listing these would be add just one more piece of largely
pointless horrendous documentation.

Perhaps if Marek feels particularly strongly about this, proposing an
additional line to for the SubmittingPatches document to say get your
title format by looking at the log for what you are patching will do
the job? (I can't immediately spot anything equivalent in there...)

Re: [PATCH 3/3] IIO: arm: Add LRADC to i.MX28 dts

[Marek Vasut]

Dear Jonathan Cameron,

> On 20/08/12 08:52, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:29:23AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >> Mostly these prefixes are an excuse for grumpy maintainers to moan
> >> at people :)
> > 
> > Yeah, I have to become grumpy when my comment gets ignored and I have
> > to make it right (for several times) to avoid my upstream moaning at me.
> 
> Not at all. My upstream has never moaned at me about it, but I still
> like to moan about it myself ;)

Your upstream is enjoyable to work with :)

> > Is it so hard?  You are not creating a new subsystem but just patching
> > an existing file.  A "git log" on the file simply shows you how to do it
> 
> Indeed. A file listing these would be add just one more piece of largely
> pointless horrendous documentation.

I was thinking more like a list of tags ... based on directories or something. 
But giving it a further thought, I see the trouble now.

> Perhaps if Marek feels particularly strongly about this, proposing an
> additional line to for the SubmittingPatches document to say get your
> title format by looking at the log for what you are patching will do
> the job? (I can't immediately spot anything equivalent in there...)

That might just be it ;-)

Thanks

Best regards,
Marek Vasut