Subject: Re: Clarification for the use of additional fields in the message
 body
To: Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251014170.2080@hadrien>
 <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251840450.7035@hadrien>
 <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402252117150.2047@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402262129250.2221@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <558EB32E.6090003@users.sourceforge.net>
 <558EB4DE.3080406@users.sourceforge.net> <20150707023103.GA22043@kroah.com>
 <559B6FF8.9010704@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9Nn7LKdqT9E0bykY8jpEc-Ugxn8wby5yLcW+nsx=yG3NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <559B85CD.6040200@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9Npqma18pj=ZsxYpCNDCm-AjjXvw61MGKBEKSYvg_LUBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <559BBDD6.7040808@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAH6sp9O=NgJXOJzQaaA0o_yae+ae1oJa5Kcqmpo-WWBO_xUW+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <559BFB19.2080700@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAGRGNgXTN8AxBNNfie4KvvErOXm3LUyL_QLLWQ6TN_wJgJkD-A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Chris Park <chris.park@atmel.com>,
	Dean Lee <dean.lee@atmel.com>,
	Johnny Kim <johnny.kim@atmel.com>,
	Rachel Kim <rachel.kim@atmel.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <559CCC9D.8050606@users.sourceforge.net> (sfid-20150708_090955_862110_66B0DFC7)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 09:09:17 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGRGNgXTN8AxBNNfie4KvvErOXm3LUyL_QLLWQ6TN_wJgJkD-A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

> There's a file in the documentation directory of the kernel
> tree describing submitting patches and email client setup.
> Read them both,

I read this information several times.


> do what they say without anything extra.

Do you see any special consequences if a bit of "extra" functionality
is already provided by the Git software for a while?


> Your attempts to "improve" on the system are unnecessary

It seems that my approach does not need improvements for the current
command "git am".
Would a few extensions for the available documentation help to clarify
the situation?


Do items like "commit mail address" and "commit timestamp"
belong together for the data structure "author" by design
in this content management system?


> and annoying people.

I understand that various update suggestions can be surprising.
It is also usual that corresponding acceptance might take
a bit longer than what some contributors would prefer.

Regards,
Markus