From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com [87.81.244.161]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D21570FA9 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 08:41:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id s7N8enod012559; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:40:49 +0100 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id xHdap0Vzmh04; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:40:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id s7N8ehEF012556 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:40:44 +0100 Message-ID: <1408783244.5457.10.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Richard Tollerton Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:40:44 +0100 In-Reply-To: <8761hkpmx0.fsf@weregild.amer.corp.natinst.com> References: <78fc1827553729a69ee665bf4ef7e33495d9de0b.1407177403.git.ben.shelton@ni.com> <53E129D4.3050402@windriver.com> <53E14013.1000301@windriver.com> <8761hkpmx0.fsf@weregild.amer.corp.natinst.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Patch message guidelines and internal/corporate fields X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 08:41:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 10:24 -0500, Richard Tollerton wrote: > Randy MacLeod writes: > > > Wind River patches used to include a "CQID" tag but we've changed > > our process to avoid needing such internal tags. If National > > Instruments can do so as well, that'd be best. > > > > I did check my oe-core email list history and this seems like the > > first patch from NI that has the tags included so I thought > > I'd reply and see if we can get the tags dropped. > > IIRC, we pinged Phil a few months ago on this topic, and he thought > internal tags were OK. I think Wind River might have been cited as an > example. > > I see that > http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines hasn't > been updated with this requirement. Should it be? Will that require TSC > approval? I don't have a strong preference on this to be honest. I can imagine cases where its useful to have some kind of tracking of issues into the final commits. Obviously it would be better if everyone can understand what the numbers mean, equally, it seems pointless to force people to strip them when they might be useful to people contributing to the project. If they are used as a substitute for a good commit message, that wouldn't be acceptable. Also, if they were taking over the commit messages, that would able be unacceptable. So if we can keep them to a small part of the commit, I'm prepared to let them pass but it can't be at the expense of good commit messages. I don't believe we need a TSC decision, that would only be needed if there were strong disagreements we were unable to resolve and I don't think we're quite there yet :) I'll let others comment though and see where we're at. Cheers, Richard