Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:55890 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932385Ab0AFThT convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:37:19 -0500 From: Michael Buesch To: =?utf-8?q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] b43: N-PHY: b43_nphy_get_tx_gains Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:36:53 +0100 Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "John W. Linville" , "bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de" References: <201001061922.58203.mb@bu3sch.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201001062036.55758.mb@bu3sch.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday 06 January 2010 20:29:36 Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > You may read Documentation/SubmittingPatches and format your future > > patches according to that. > > Well, that's really poor joke :| Manually creating .orig files, using > "diff -up" and so dropping local commits "strategy"...? Er, I don't > think I'll use this one. Nobody said you need to fix your internal workflow. Why would anybody care _how_ you generate your patches? You could manually type them into your cellphone with T9. If that it results in a properly formated patch in the end, nobody would complain. So yes, reading other people's patches probably is a good idea to start with. In general only put stuff into the mail that you want to show up in the commit message. (If you want to have additional stuff that doesn't show up in the commit message, you can use the "---" delimiter. But that's documented elsewhere so I don't have to explain that here...) -- Greetings, Michael