Re: [PATCH 2/6] SubmittingPatches: discuss non-ident trailers

["Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026, at 09:32, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:02:46PM +0200, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2026, at 13:35, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
>> >>[snip]
>> >
>> > Hm, I wonder whether this is a bit too vague to really be helpful for a
>> > newcomer. Instead of alluding to such trailers, wouldn't it be
>> > preferable if we added those as actual examples to the list of known
>> > trailers and then tell folks that they can invent their own ones if
>> > there is a good reason to do so?
>>
>> Honestly there are so few non-ident trailers that I don’t think they can
>> be listed as common trailers:
>>
>> 1. The Git project doesn’t need them (e.g. no bug tracker)
>> 2. They seem mostly for use by other projects (bug trackers again)
>>
>> With this list:
>>
>>     git log --format='%(trailers:only,keyonly)' | sort | uniq
>>
>> If you filter out the ident-looking ones:
>>
>>     grep -v --extended-regexp -- '-[Bb]y$'
>>
>> There are few left. And some can be discarded:
>>
>> • Change-Id
>> • Message-ID
>> • Fixes (pointing to a commit)
>>
>> So to address your point:
>>
>> 1. Maybe this is so niche that it is not worth mentioning; or
>> 2. Maybe give a concrete example like `Closes: <bug link>`?
>
> Well, we don't use "Closes:" trailers, either. So I'd rather side with
> your (1) and just not mention them at all.

Yeah, I think this can just be dropped. Thanks.