From: Linus Torvalds <email@example.com>
To: Kees Cook <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Paulo Miguel Almeida <email@example.com>,
Sam James <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <email@example.com>,
Eric Biggers <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] hardening updates for v6.3-rc1
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 11:16:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgw++ccN-Pd1npZsBSDD3z6EGUSKsWuAEh5YC-TmfJAug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 11:38 AM Kees Cook <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Please pull these hardening updates for v6.3-rc1.
So I've pulled this, but while looking at it, I see commit
5c0f220e1b2d ("Merge branch 'for-linus/hardening' into
And that one-liner shortlog part is literally the whole commit message.
I've said this before, and apparently I need to say this again: if you
cannot be bothered to explain *WHY* a merge exists, then that merge is
buggy garbage by definition.
This really should be a rule that every single developer should take
to heart. I'm not just putting random words together in a random
I repeat: if you cannot explain a merge, then JUST DON'T DO IT.
It's really that simple. There is absolutely *NEVER* an excuse for
merges without explaining why those merges exist.
In this case, I really think that merge should not have existed at
all, and the lack of explanation is because there *IS* no explanation
But if there was a reason for it, then just state it, dammit, and make
that merge commit look sensible.
Because right now it just looks entirely pointless. And I literally
*detest* pointless merges. They only make the history look worse and
harder to read.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-21 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-17 19:38 [GIT PULL] hardening updates for v6.3-rc1 Kees Cook
2023-02-21 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2023-02-21 19:49 ` Kees Cook
2023-02-21 20:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-02-21 19:29 ` pr-tracker-bot
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).