From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 100E5C00 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [66.63.167.143]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4768881 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:22:19 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1562250136.3187.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: James Bottomley To: Michael Ellerman , Thomas Gleixner , Takashi Iwai Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 07:22:16 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87y31eov1l.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> References: <7b73e1b7-cc34-982d-2a9c-acf62b88da16@linuxfoundation.org> <20190628205102.GA3131@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> <87y31eov1l.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Patch version changes in commit logs? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2019-07-04 at 22:15 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Thomas Gleixner writes: > > On Sat, 29 Jun 2019, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 22:51:03 +0200, > > > Luck, Tony wrote: > > > > That captures for posterity the useful information without > > > > bulking up the commit log with the blow-by-blow deltas of > > > > how the patch series evolved across 27 versions submitted > > > > to the mailing list. > > > > > > Agreed. And I'm thinking whether we may have come consistent tag > > > for following the post discussions on ML archive. Then the > > > detailed > > > descriptions can be dropped from the changelog, and readers can > > > still > > > follow easily. e.g. the patch version change can be simply a > > > reference URL. > > > > This tag exists today: > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/MESSAGE-ID > > > > my 'grab patches from list' scripts insert that tag automatically > > and it's part of the commit changelog in git. That allows you to > > just jump to the mail archive of the merged submission. > > If you've got the link back to the mailing list archive, do you also > need Cc: tags in the change log? Cc: tags are another git artefact. They're how you tell git-send-email where to send copies of the patch for review or notice, but they don't really provide any intrinsic historical value. Perhaps we should alter the convention and say that if you're using git-send-email and need a cc: list, then you should put all the cc tags below the cutoff, say always at the bottom. That way the version information would be first, which is more important for the review, the sender would preserve and show the cc list and it would be eliminated on git-am. Any cc tags that were necessary (like cc: stable) could go above the cutoff. James