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 3DE231953A1; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:30:12 +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=1743427815; cv=none; b=t0HvYIB4mBTrEfWxNSnhBCxGd7/iYuAxPLwo9UaoioWkLDjX0kVrREPHbWiLuIyc6cbP+LU73SmhD6PhugM7R1EBzuUQrXiYGLHOQvv4r0OtFaxvz8b/wZMH/evXXhGvJ+Gix0GXNrPSC8baG5RVPwZ+qStPWX/IaG5E4dlmGDU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743427815; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xvAxcwjxyDJWhDXu7y5JzLvjmhF/Q59dGZAjf5dEFKE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Y9BxUiKn17LwEB/RMexJ3g7Sqr2RoklV9Qwq/UtGOi0MidMsmwdWdGubQL4kCBebuWXItQASJYKIRdz3UJx+oQPGCev2h6Yi9VzM9m2fONEe8fOQWE4s2olJzKap6Orrtugu7wgbSahgm06YTqMeYD+e0xjfyIAWT1qpYx1eZ6g= 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=nr44Ae1H; 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="nr44Ae1H" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net BB63640407 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1743427438; bh=3vxoY1G1VGLAh9adACl66l74IKVyT0LyXE9/eEvA3mo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=nr44Ae1Hm1y8Afi7T/AqZYrVmVe2NiUTLykpI+Qv/ZO3Twlt+1m6SJpNPO3phY/Dr X69N752/DXzz0WluggDvCTeSOpLQpb5x2fdQffnNeRmZZpOq4Dka0YfmPlO8UXUBf/ RckQ0cqfM8+DmNcxB93dLS4DqDLCCeyyeN8vd7PCdaAd8ZlVPc4a+mGjDw9MBk+XYX X7tr35VXUF93tEiM9PkZeA2TlRX2hfDX9De7bLbY1utJKMgvEWhun8v+Zb0Wljggc+ VWc9tiJHBqNorLlBVSgzUM8xQtkj9MU4fgVBDLD7wVf3N4srVtxfHCPaS0jbwhj2NE xtXjfeRAo3QRg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::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 BB63640407; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:23:58 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Integral Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ziyao@disroot.org, integral@archlinuxcn.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A contradiction of "summary phrase" definition in process/submitting-patches.rst In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 07:23:57 -0600 Message-ID: <87h639e3ki.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Integral writes: > I found a contradiction in process/submitting-patches.rst: > > The canonical patch subject line is:: > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase > > The ``summary phrase`` may be prefixed by tags enclosed in square > brackets: "Subject: [PATCH ...] ". > > The former means "summary phrase" doesn't include "subsystem", while the= =20 > latter means "summary phrase" includes "subsystem". > > So, which one is correct? I honestly don't see the contradiction here; the summary phrase is as described here; the subsystem indicator is part of it. When in doubt, look at the commits in the subsystem you are interested in, and you will see the expected pattern quickly enough. Thanks, jon