Re: Git commit process question.

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1554 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 09:51:21AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:20:41PM -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 4/1/19 4:02 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2019-04-01 at 15:33 -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I have noticed a large number of git commits with no header
> > >> information being accepted.
> > > Can you be more specific about what "no header information" means? You
> > > mean a shortlog and no full log message?
> > Commits with just a "subject" and signoff. No additional information
> > 
> > We tend to reference back to how the kernel does things.
> > 
> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
> > These two sections in particular.
> > 
> > 
> >     2) Describe your changes
> > 
> > Describe your problem. Whether your patch is a one-line bug fix or 5000
> > lines of a new feature, there must be an underlying problem that
> > motivated you to do this work. Convince the reviewer that there is a
> > problem worth fixing and that it makes sense for them to read past the
> > first paragraph.
> >...
> 
> The kernel does not have "upgrade foo to the latest upstream version" commits.
> 
> With the Automatic Upgrade Helper this is a semi-automatic task, and 
> most of the time there is no specific motivation other than upgrading
> to the latest upstream version.

But since that's just filling in a template the body can also be a
template perhaps with useful AUH data (run at ... by ... ?) ?

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]