From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Henne Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata-piix: kerneldoc-error-on-ata_piixc.patch 2nd try Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:37:38 +0200 Message-ID: <45183E12.1080503@nachtwindheim.de> References: <451826BE.2040201@nachtwindheim.de> <4518305C.3090906@pobox.com> <20060925131151.4f73612c.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <45183880.40003@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from server6.greatnet.de ([83.133.96.26]:42721 "EHLO server6.greatnet.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751127AbWIYUhX (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:37:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <45183880.40003@pobox.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Randy Dunlap , Andrew Morton , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik schrieb: > Randy Dunlap wrote: >> I agree with all of these except #4. Maybe you can reconcile your >> preference with that in Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which >> contains: >> >> >> The canonical patch message body contains the following: >> >> - A "from" line specifying the patch author. >> >> >> A patch submitter should not need to know the patch receiver's >> personal preferences and vary patches based on those. > > > It's not a personal preference. It's all based on git-applymbox, pretty > much. > > The SubmittingPatches doc should be updated to clarify that a From line > is not needed in the email body, if it is the same as the From line in > the RFC822 header. > > Jeff Thanks for pointing my nose on this guys! I'll keep that in mind when writing patches, but that from line should be discussed by the maintainers. Greets and thanks, Henne