Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] [4/4] Discuss how to better prevent backports of commits that turn out to cause regressions

Paolo Bonzini
2024-06-16T08:23:02Z

On 6/16/24 06:59, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Here's the thing: if you applied it unchanged from lore, you already
> have the email address and a date in the commit.
>
> Are you seriously saying that you can't find it based on that?

Sure I _can_ but it's not especially handy (bordering self-inflicted
pain, tbh). Having the Message-ID of the URL makes it a lot easier to
find the message in your mail program and reply to it if needed.

I also used to have a script that tagged as "merged" any messages in my
inbox for which the corresponding Message-ID trailer appeared in
linux.git, but it broke at some point and I never fixed it...

(In fact, that is IMO the main point in favor of Message-ID - use it for
the plain message you're applying, so that it can be used to reply and
for tracking purposes; use Link for the discussion that _prompted_ the
patch to be created. But I'm not going to argue too much about it).

Paolo

> Now, if you*base* your commit it on somebody elses work on the lists,
> you should most definitely say that, and say something like
>
> Based on patch submission by Xyz at [1]
>
> Link:https://lore.kernel.org/...../ [1]
>
> and that's_wonderful_.
>
> But if you just did "b4 am" and applied a patch, what's the advantage
> of including information that adds no real value?