From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: assign random address Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:37:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20071216153746.aa4f5e72.rdunlap@xenotime.net> References: <20071211154835.75ace6bc@freepuppy.rosehill> <20071216.133717.202852113.davem@davemloft.net> <20071216142915.c120d25c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20071216.152606.35263254.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, berrange@redhat.com, jeff@garzik.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, rjw@sisk.pl To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:44395 "HELO xenotime.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1760641AbXLPXhv (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 18:37:51 -0500 Received: from midway.site ([71.117.233.180]) by xenotime.net for ; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:37:47 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20071216.152606.35263254.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:26:06 -0800 (PST) David Miller wrote: > From: Andrew Morton > Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:29:15 -0800 > > > On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:37:17 -0800 (PST) David Miller wrote: > > > > > From: Stephen Hemminger > > > Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:48:35 -0800 > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: assign random address > > > > > > "bridge" should all-caps and in brackets, > > > > No, "bridge" should not be in []. Lots of people's patch-receiving scripts > > assume that any text in [] is to be removed as the patch is committed. It > > contains text which is only relevant to the particular email which carried > > the patch. Stuff like "patch" and "4/5" and "linux-2.6.23", etc. > > I don't use scripts, I edit it by hand. And when I do ever use > scripts I will make sure they accomodate "[$SUBSYSTEM]" format > subject lines, you can be sure. > > And you can even make those scripts happy by doing: > > [Patch 1/7] [SUBSYSTEM]: Foo bar baz... > > And if you haven't noticed over the past few years, this is > is the convention we've been using in the networking. > > I munge every one of your (and everyone else's) changelog entry > headers this way. Without exception, every single one. > > So when you don't follow this convention, you make more typing > and more work for me. The more patches I get from someone > the more important it is for this convention to be followed. > > I find it very hard to believe that you haven't once looked > at the hundreds of patches I've applied of your's and not > noticed how I reformat everything. I have noticed the difference in networking vs. rest-of-kernel. Rest-of-kernel generally follows the canonical format in Documentation/SubmittingPatches: 14) The canonical patch format The canonical patch subject line is: Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase --- ~Randy