From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755943Ab2GFMm7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:42:59 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:28541 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751374Ab2GFMm5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:42:57 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=ZuBv2qHG c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=TktROVI7lUoA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=D19gQVrFAAAA:8 a=POFbXC6fAAAA:20 a=6UbPHLlvKfP0LD6110wA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ARQLUNvo-bYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1341578575.14828.6.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND or not ATTEND] That's the question! From: Steven Rostedt To: Glauber Costa Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Frederic Weisbecker , Richard Cochran , LKML , ksummit-2012-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 08:42:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4FF6C148.7030402@parallels.com> References: <20120615233413.GB8894@kroah.com> <20120616072906.7469ec24@tpl.lwn.net> <20120620195121.GA1719@fieldses.org> <4FF6B32A.7070006@parallels.com> <20120706095450.GB7728@somewhere.redhat.com> <20120706101149.GA26028@localhost.localdomain> <4FF6BFC7.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4FF6C148.7030402@parallels.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1+b1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:43 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > > Please no! > > I don't see why we should clutter the changelog with tags for reasons as > > unimportant as measuring some patch's value! > > > Stronger: Having the maintainer to do more work is hardly a way to decrease > the amount of work he does. (Well, it could be in some cases, but not in > this) Strongest: We actually implemented this. It was called 'Impact' tags (search the git logs). Linus *hated* them. He got really upset and flamed us for doing it. https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/15/296 Basically it's duplicating the subject line. The subject line should have the impact (worth) of the patch. Heck, we should just add '/trivial' to the subject. Like "x86/trivial: clean white space in x.c". Or /doc or /comment or whatever. That should not be a problem, searches are nicer on git log --pretty=oneline, and we should push to have all non functional changes have such a tag in the subject. Then we can split these changes out from functional changes. There, solved ;) -- Steve