Re: Link trailers revisited (was Re: [GIT PULL] io_uring fix for 6.17-rc5)

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 01:27:04PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 03:33:14PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > > (Changing the subject and aiming this at workflows.)
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 11:06:01AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 5 Sept 2025 at 10:45, Konstantin Ryabitsev
> > > > <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you just want this to become a no-op, or will it be better if it's used
> > > > > only with the patch.msgid.link domain namespace to clearly indicate that it's
> > > > > just a provenance link?
> > > > 
> > > > So I wish it at least had some way to discourage the normal mindless
> > > > use - and in a perfect world that there was some more useful model for
> > > > adding links automatically.
> > > > 
> > > > For example, I feel like for the cover letter of a multi-commit
> > > > series, the link to the patch series submission is potentially more
> > > > useful - and likely much less annoying - because it would go into the
> > > > merge message, not individual commits.
> > > 
> > > We do support this usage using `b4 shazam -M` -- it's the functional
> > > equivalent of applying a pull request and will use the cover letter contents
> > > as the initial source of the merge commit message. I do encourage people to
> > > use this more than just a linear `git am` for series, for a number of reasons:
> > > 
> > > - this clearly delineates the start and end of the series
> > > - this incorporates the contents cover letter that can give more info about
> > >   the series than just individual commits *without* the need to hit the lore
> > >   archive
> > > - this lets maintainers record any additional thoughts they may have in the
> > >   merge commit, alongside with the original cover letter
> > > 
> > > Obviously, we don't want to use the cover letter as-is, which is why b4 will
> > > open the configured editor to let the maintainer pulling in the series make
> > > any changes to the cover letter before it becomes the merge commit.
> > 
> > I like this a lot, and just tried it, but it ends up applying the
> > patches from the list without my signed-off-by, which will cause
> > linux-next to complain when it sees that I committed patches without
> > that.
> > 
> > Did I miss an option to `b4 shazam`?  Does it need to add a -s option
> > like `b4 am` has?
> 
> Oh nevermind, it does support -s.  It's just not documented :)
> 
> let me go make a patch...

And it is documented.  Ugh, nevermind, I need more coffee, sorry for the
noise.