Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935006Ab0KQRHv (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:07:51 -0500 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:34156 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757032Ab0KQRHu (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:07:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:07:47 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Jiri Kosina Cc: Stefan Richter , Randy Dunlap , Florian Mickler , Joe Perches , 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: <20101117170746.GB19488@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <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> <20101116122102.86e7e0b9.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20101116230126.GB24623@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20101117014427.41d85b13@stein> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Killing turkeys causes winter. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1711 Lines: 34 On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:53:35AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Stefan Richter wrote: > > Why should we codify our conventions in MAINTAINERS to accommodate the > > specific problem of virtually a _single_ patch author? It seems to be the way we're heading in general - look at all the recent work on MAINTAINERS and get_maintainer.pl. There seems to be a genral push to make all this stuff automatable. > Either the maintainer wants the patch. Then he is certainly able to apply > it no matter the subject line (I personally am getting a lot of patches > which don't follow the format I am using in my tree ... converting > Subject: lines is so trivial that I have never felt like bothering anyone > about it ... it's basically single condition in a shellscript). Or the It's slightly more than that if you're dealing with more than one area, and I also find this sort of stuff is a good flag for scrubbing the patch in greater detail - when patches stand out from a 1000ft visual overview there's a fair chance that there's other issues so if people regularly submit good patches that have only cosmetic issues I find it's worth guiding them away from that. > maintainer doesn't feel like the patch is worth it, and then the > subject-line format really doesn't matter. In this case if I don't apply it it's likely to end up going in via your tree and then I'll still have to deal with the merge conflicts which are more annoying. -- 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/