Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759358AbZCBSg3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:36:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751103AbZCBSgS (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:36:18 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58138 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751398AbZCBSgR (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:36:17 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:34:37 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Mark Brown Cc: Stefan Richter , Theodore Tso , Andy Whitcroft , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on empty commit log bodies Message-Id: <20090302103437.f3109332.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20090302182456.GF19744@sirena.org.uk> References: <20090228175218.GA4606@sirena.org.uk> <49A98F93.5030206@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090228210223.GA23191@sirena.org.uk> <49A9C252.50204@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090301001829.GA10751@mit.edu> <20090301004618.GA12909@sirena.org.uk> <20090301025357.GC10751@mit.edu> <20090302131514.GC19744@sirena.org.uk> <49ABF825.1010501@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090302100158.bb83bec6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090302182456.GF19744@sirena.org.uk> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-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 Content-Length: 1621 Lines: 34 On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:24:57 +0000 Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 10:01:58AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > I think what triggered this was a patch from Mark which had no > > changelog and which had me sitting there wondering wtf it does, whether > > we need it in 2.6.29, whether we need it in 2.6.28.x and earlier and me > > not having the foggiest clue then getting grumpy. > > Do you mean no changelog in the body of the e-mail here? I'm assuming > now that you mean no changelog in the body but when you say "no > changelog" that reads differently. I'm not saying the changelog was > perfect here but your comments really do read like you felt there was > nothing at all. The text covering a patch should describe what the patch does, why it does it, how it does it and it should describe the end-user effects of not having the patch present. Any and all of these can be skipped if they are utterly obvious and unneeded. Changes should be properly described, that's all. The means by which that is done isn't terribly important. Sometimes most of the description is in code comments, or in a newly-added Documentation/ file. The reason I asked you personally to always send a changelog is because I quite frequently sit there scratching my head at your patches not having a clue what they do nor how to prioritise them. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/