From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754042Ab3A3JNq (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:13:46 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:59676 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753183Ab3A3JNo (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:13:44 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,566,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="280260111" From: Jani Nikula To: Florian Mickler Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Daniel Vetter Subject: A patch referencing this bug report has been merged... Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.1+22~g943ed44 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 11:14:01 +0200 Message-ID: <87zjzrdodi.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Florian, all - First, thanks for your work on adding the bugzilla comments when patches referencing bugs get merged. I find it useful. Recently however there was a comment about a commit referencing a commit referencing the bug report. Turns out the comment was missing one level of indirection, it was really about a commit referencing a commit referencing a commit referencing the bug [1]. Do we really need go that far, or is that a bug in your scripts? I think three levels of indirection is more noise than signal; two might be still be okay. What do others think? BR, Jani. [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52424#c56