MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20101111002702.GA3477@amd>
References: <20101109124610.GB11477@amd> <20101109130133.GE11477@amd>
 <20101109162516.GB6217@infradead.org> <20101109220833.GG3246@amd>
 <20101110163224.GB15130@infradead.org> <20101111002702.GA3477@amd>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 14:07:36 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTimyQvo5PPjvk-3u3uCfK--YdDi0qM=smt+g=gN-@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/6] fs: d_delete change
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1195
Lines: 25

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> Right, I'll switch to a different way of commenting that git-am
> does not pick up.

The standard way is to just put it after the "---" thing. So you end
up having the actual kernel changelog at the top (which is, after all,
the summary and should be readable on its own, so making people read
that first makes perfect sense), and then put the extended explanation
that doesn't make sense for the changelog after the "---".

Of course, quite often you would want the commit message to be
exhaustive, so maybe the extended explanation ends up making sense for
the changelog too. But if it's more of a "discussion material" thing
(eg things like "Hi guys, this is _why_ I think this is the right
approach: ...") that way it's clear both to tools and by now to most
developers that the stuff that comes after the "---" is really
extended material.

                      Linus
--
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/