Re: [PATCH 3/3] SubmittingPatches: Document the use of git

[Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>]

On 12/15/13 12:59, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Most of the mechanical portions of SubmittingPatches exist to help patch
> submitters replicate the output of git.  Mention this explicitly, both
> as a reminder that git will help with this process, and as signposting to
> let git users know what they can safely skip.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index 53e6590..fdad7d1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -14,7 +14,10 @@ Read Documentation/SubmitChecklist for a list of items to check
>  before submitting code.  If you are submitting a driver, also read
>  Documentation/SubmittingDrivers.
>  
> -
> +Many of these steps describe the default behavior of the git version
> +control system; if you use git to prepare your patches, you'll find much
> +of the mechanical work done for you, though you'll still need to prepare
> +and document a sensible set of patches.
>  
>  --------------------------------------------
>  SECTION 1 - CREATING AND SENDING YOUR CHANGE
> @@ -25,7 +28,9 @@ SECTION 1 - CREATING AND SENDING YOUR CHANGE
>  1) "diff -up"
>  ------------
>  
> -Use "diff -up" or "diff -uprN" to create patches.
> +Use "diff -up" or "diff -uprN" to create patches.  git generates patches
> +in this form by default; if you're using git, you can skip this section
> +entirely.
>  
>  All changes to the Linux kernel occur in the form of patches, as
>  generated by diff(1).  When creating your patch, make sure to create it
> @@ -66,19 +71,14 @@ Make sure your patch does not include any extra files which do not
>  belong in a patch submission.  Make sure to review your patch -after-
>  generated it with diff(1), to ensure accuracy.
>  
> -If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you may want to look into
> -splitting them into individual patches which modify things in
> -logical stages.  This will facilitate easier reviewing by other
> -kernel developers, very important if you want your patch accepted.
> -There are a number of scripts which can aid in this:
> -

I object to the removal of the quilt reference.  git is overkill for
simple patches.

> -Quilt:
> -http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt
> +If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you need to split them into
> +individual patches which modify things in logical stages; see section
> +#3.  This will facilitate easier reviewing by other kernel developers,
> +very important if you want your patch accepted.
>  
> -Andrew Morton's patch scripts:
> -http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/stuff/patch-scripts.tar.gz
> -Instead of these scripts, quilt is the recommended patch management
> -tool (see above).
> +If you're using git, "git rebase -i" can help you with this process.  If
> +you're not using git, quilt <http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt>
> +is another popular alternative.
>  
>  
>  
> @@ -607,7 +607,8 @@ patch.
>  If you are going to include a diffstat after the "---" marker, please
>  use diffstat options "-p 1 -w 70" so that filenames are listed from
>  the top of the kernel source tree and don't use too much horizontal
> -space (easily fit in 80 columns, maybe with some indentation).
> +space (easily fit in 80 columns, maybe with some indentation).  (git
> +generates appropriate diffstats by default.)
>  
>  See more details on the proper patch format in the following
>  references.
> 


-- 
~Randy