From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from msg-1.mailo.com (msg-1.mailo.com [213.182.54.11]) (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 4D20B7B for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 22:06:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mailo.com; s=mailo; t=1666908370; bh=c8QaiV75pMR3vYy4gE46oMmf9t0T4b4SD19bmLy0GIk=; h=X-EA-Auth:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To; b=UDQCFtCD2uJCJ3qTDfrZhWM3xsYadqKiMskHz+asqGkaNj8gjlTK/yueqtA1UhxUC noKf2rqHHIEYERKN3x0kXjTTqklxkLe6vf42GZqrYSHzEqjjViD/iCEFD77UUXkDUd noGr2NlT4Tk2dpC3XiUP2rC2UeMrvBAVdlE/PjfM= Received: by b-1.in.mailobj.net [192.168.90.11] with ESMTP via [213.182.55.206] Fri, 28 Oct 2022 00:06:10 +0200 (CEST) X-EA-Auth: LSwCIH8WYYhpZxsjxtVjkCMWONbSKC5ISLudmAjz4aplEWjiFmCnzGgnHutTODf+Vcw3leWfc3HCnYLQxg4a3QrvaWT8PBE2 Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 03:36:07 +0530 From: Deepak R Varma To: Alison Schofield Cc: Outreachy Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [Outreachy] Wiki updated needed - Patchset Subject Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: outreachy@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 04:00:58AM +0530, Deepak Varma wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 02:12:46PM -0700, Alison Schofield wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 10:59:38AM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 06:51:11PM -0700, Alison Schofield wrote: > > > > Greg KH has mentioned this a couple of times lately - > > > > > > > > >> Any reason you do not have "staging: vt6655:" as the prefix for > > > > >> this 0/X email subject line? > > > > >> > > > > >> thanks, > > > > >> > > > > >> greg k-h > > > > > > > > A quick peek in the tutorial tells me it could be made clearer. > > > > It needs to explicitly say the prefix is required, and then > > > > make sure any examples do it. > > > > > > Hello Alison, > > > There already is a section named "Patch Subject formatting" on this link [1] > > > with enough description to determine the patch subject prefix. Can you please > > > review and confirm where we should improve further to make it clearer?? > > > > > > [1] https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy > > > > > > Thank you, > > > ./drv > > > > > > In https://kernelnewbies.org/Outreachyfirstpatch > > > > The example cover letter in 'Submitting a Patchset' has the > > subject "[RFC 0/7] Update REPORTING-BUGS", with no subsys. > > It is also confusing because the cover letter is an RFC and > > the patches are a mix of RFC and PATCH. Very atypical. > > > > Let's replace this example with one that was actually submitted > > and accepted by an Outreachy Intern. No slight intended to the > > existing set as it contains an interesting set of changes. However, > > an example for newbies might better come from newbies. > > > > How about a patchset off this list? > > > > Would you mind using this one of yours: > > [PATCH v4 00/11] staging: r8188eu: trivial code cleanup patches > > but trim it to 3-4 patches plus the cover. > > > > It's not a trivial edit, because you need to replace all the > > example steps with the new patchset content. > > Hello Alison, > I made the changes as suggested and saved those. Looks like they might have > already gone to production. Sorry about that. I was thinking they will be > submitted to a moderator for review before releasing, > > Could you please review and let me know if any edits are required. Hello Alison, Did you get a chance to review the edits I made? Please share your feedback so that I can proceed with the next changes to the tutorial page. Thank you, ./drv > > Thank you, > ./drv > > > > > Thanks, > > Alison > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alison > > > > > > > > > >