From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31A511940B0 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 23:13:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719443591; cv=none; b=ok8qCaT+nYwag9GALH092s/YpDBMd0Vtt1kTgtFgGg6EN3VUN2otXBmVuvmnFmvUw2btFySgZ9RgfnfG7l0xlkVAcbiqnsPGuPyvkDau6fuuq8nBnETY9NVhmLMIT7H0I77kLydzRgIR8hPkKl3dRu6w1HSV6q96W5Jb+RltP4M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719443591; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4MNHDuB27X4XbIAQZjJn55ihsbt8baZdU7aNrx01P88=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QacU4POC7jmG305BAVj0BsEc1HartdSWlybp9+XcXdhEiRY7lHLiYrOPmS7wRqM0l7Rc9q7Fwvaet3dSstaZKCX0VTRzE+cFLOJSlJ0pjA69Jit81bLLkNXpqNKqa1DUIqPkUSHiQxzTeUuf0FBsgiyRxUBThHU6xbKZWryMeq0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=BrM6T+Er; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="BrM6T+Er" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 4A0CD45E2B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1719443589; bh=Lf1chSU6XVlbAueGCt5A9XabdPOkNuXkxU1yuwXYxaM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=BrM6T+Erj9ZDLDHhti8Fyao9nDqSPfxpLFxUDEJxCCZeqVyrg1/KJ4zhPfLpjQHJ/ Go3rOocScliB3XeK917BjmVHDmjxwd2No1Aml9QOOLIYg9Hih6HyJkJrr7mTpG2Nyq keJ3G5uXpE+Rm5Dk8Y0wOj9zsQdBKVhQ90MTB+q/LuMhkoOGQl11vZfNwIP52Rp8HD JjO0z2+4PEoFFIrMmNp6b3KaCK9Ydc6ovzqJj7x0ar9Qm24+dTGhJoh0DO72WbIFj/ yoED1DGq1zYscfCOMOJe6xIjXwVaPYc7NN6H2NOErQ8NMo0R4ae0zwdpDKQCEtWMla VfAi0CqSps0SQ== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A0CD45E2B; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 23:13:09 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Konstantin Ryabitsev , Kees Cook Cc: Carlos Bilbao , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Documentation: best practices for using Link trailers In-Reply-To: <20240621-amorphous-topaz-cormorant-cc2ddb@lemur> References: <20240619-docs-patch-msgid-link-v2-0-72dd272bfe37@linuxfoundation.org> <20240619-docs-patch-msgid-link-v2-2-72dd272bfe37@linuxfoundation.org> <202406211355.4AF91C2@keescook> <20240621-amorphous-topaz-cormorant-cc2ddb@lemur> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 17:13:08 -0600 Message-ID: <87cyo3fgcb.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Konstantin Ryabitsev writes: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 02:07:44PM GMT, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 02:24:07PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: >> > + This URL should be used when referring to relevant mailing list >> > + topics, related patch sets, or other notable discussion threads. >> > + A convenient way to associate ``Link:`` trailers with the commit >> > + message is to use markdown-like bracketed notation, for example:: >> > ... >> > + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/some-msgid@here # [1] >> > + Link: https://bugzilla.example.org/bug/12345 # [2] >> >> Why are we adding the extra "# " characters? The vast majority of >> existing Link tags don't do this: > > That's just convention. In general, the hash separates the trailer from the > comment: > > Trailer-name: actual-trailer-body # comment > Did we ever come to a conclusion on this? This one character seems to be the main source of disagreement in this series, I'm wondering if I should just apply it and let the painting continue thereafter...? jon