From: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] arm: fix a comment
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 08:20:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130514082010.7f040285@lilith> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130514104224.B73D.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com>
Hi Masahiro,
On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:43:07 +0900, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> wrote:
>
> > Changed for v2:
> > - Fix one more comment
>
> I added one more comment line fixed at version 2.
>
> So, I am thinking the commit log should become
> "arm: fix comments"
> rather than
> "arm: fix a comment"
>
> Is it better to re-post my patch as version 3
> with only commit log changed?
> Am I too worried about it??
You should try to read your commit message summary to yourself as if
you did not know what the change is about, because that's what it is
useful for: giving people a good idea of the change. If the summary
tells everything except the actual source code change, that's good.
A summary of "arm: fix comments" indicates two things about the
change: explicitly, that it is about ARM; and implicitly, that it is
cosmetic. But it does not say which part of U-Boot it applies to, even
though this single file can be mentioned in a summary line. Readers
will have to waste some time looking at the change content to find out.
Plus, if it is cosmetic, then the fact that it is about ARM does not
matter that much, does it? e.g., someone looking for ARM changes that
might explain a weird behavior will most certainly not be interested in
this change even though it is ARM. For instance, a cosmetic fix on ARM
code could easily go in the mainline tree without going through the ARM
tree first. So, I'd put "cosmetic:" first, but admittedly, that's a
debatable point.
So... how about a V3 with a commit summary of "cosmetic: arm: fix
comments in arch/arm/lib/crt0.S" ? People reading the summary for no
particular reason will know all there is to know except the detailed
comment fixes; people looking for crt0 changes will see it, and so will
people looking for ARM changes, but "cosmetic:" will help them move it
aside in their search; "cosmetic:" helps deciding whether to apply the
patch and to which tree; etc.
> I'm new here, and I'm not sure this kind of update is mandatory.
> I will appreciate any advice.
No problem.
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-14 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-09 7:12 [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: fix a comment Masahiro Yamada
2013-05-09 13:12 ` Benoît Thébaudeau
2013-05-10 4:31 ` Masahiro Yamada
2013-05-10 4:21 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] " y at epochmail.jp.panasonic.com
2013-05-10 8:23 ` Masahiro Yamada
2013-05-10 4:24 ` Masahiro Yamada
2013-05-14 1:43 ` Masahiro Yamada
2013-05-14 6:20 ` Albert ARIBAUD [this message]
2013-05-15 8:33 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v3] cosmetic: arm: fix comments in arch/arm/lib/crt0.S Masahiro Yamada
2013-06-10 19:25 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2013-05-15 8:46 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] arm: fix a comment Masahiro Yamada
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130514082010.7f040285@lilith \
--to=albert.u.boot@aribaud.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox