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 6C3E0E38 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:50:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com (mail-io1-f68.google.com [209.85.166.68]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA2767F for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id o9so21994497iom.3 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:50:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f48.google.com (mail-io1-f48.google.com. [209.85.166.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h18sm2847177iob.80.2019.08.23.10.50.42 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:50:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f48.google.com with SMTP id t3so21890640ioj.12 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:50:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190823013619.GA8130@mit.edu> <20190823151843.GH8130@mit.edu> <20190823165018.GB19727@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20190823165018.GB19727@lunn.ch> From: Doug Anderson Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:50:26 -0700 Message-ID: To: Andrew Lunn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Joel Fernandes , Barret Rhoden , ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jonathan Nieder , Tomasz Figa , Han-Wen Nienhuys , Theodore Tso , David Rientjes , Dmitry Torokhov , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 9:50 AM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > 1. Make it allowed or suggested to put a well-formed (machine > > parseable) Change-Id "after the cut" on mailing list posts, which > > would allow you to associate v1, v2, and v3. > > > > 2. Add "Link://lkml.kernel.org/r/$MSGID_PER_PATCH" to landed patches, > > which would allow you to recover the Change-Id even after a patch > > lands. > > > > ...then I will be happy (ish). The biggest downside I see here is > > that it is much less likely that random committers out there will get > > this right. The way committers naturally have the same Change-Id from > > v1 to v2 to v3 is because it's part of the commit message and when you > > amend to a previous change it stays there. That means that these > > people will need to remember to move the Change-Id to "after the cut" > > unless we teach git-send-email to do this for you (though I guess > > maybe we could do that?). > > To make this reliable, we really need git to be doing the work. We > should also think about the typical developer workflow. > > To create a v1 of a patch, i do a git commit. To make a v2, i'm likely > to be using git rebase -i; git commit --am. > > So why not have the initial git commit allocate the UUID. git commit > --am leaves the UUID alone. git-format-patch can then put the UUID > after the ---. Can git-send-email generate the MSGID from the UUID? Yes, if we can't agree to have Change-Id part of the commit that lands as part of the kernel, then trying to get some smarts into git-send-email and git-format-patch would definitely be the way to go. -Doug