From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Frank Li <Frank.li@nxp.com>,
kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] docs: process: submitting-patches: clarify imperative mood suggestion
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:02:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cc7f07e2-437a-4be5-9e11-cd55d481fcb7@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sepwt2fe.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Hello Jon,
On 06.01.25 15:57, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> writes:
>
>> Hello Jon,
>>
>> On 30.12.24 19:40, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>> Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> While we expect commit message titles to use the imperative mood,
>>>> it's ok for commit message bodies to first include a blurb describing
>>>> the background of the patch, before delving into what's being done
>>>> to address the situation.
>>>>
>>>> Make this clearer by adding a clarification after the imperative mood
>>>> suggestion as well as listing Rob Herring's commit 52bb69be6790
>>>> ("dt-bindings: ata: pata-common: Add missing additionalProperties on
>>>> child nodes") as a good example commit message.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
>>>
>>> I'm rather less convinced about this one. We already have a whole
>>> section on describing changes. Given that this crucial document is
>>> already long and hard enough to get through, I don't really think that
>>> adding some duplicate information - and the noise of more labels - is
>>> going to improve things.
>>
>> Do you agree with the content of the patch in principle?
>>
>> My changes were motivated by a disagreement about the necessity of having
>> to use the imperative mood throughout as I described in my cover letter,
>> so I still think think that a clarification is appropriate.
>>
>> Would a v2 without the example at the end be acceptable?
>
> I will always consider a patch, but the example isn't the concern,
> really. The information you are trying to add to an already too-long
> document is already present there; I think that repeating it, and making
> this crucial document that much more unapproachable, would actively make
> things worse.
Ok, thanks for the prompt response.
Cheers,
Ahmad
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-06 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-20 9:09 [PATCH RFC 0/2] docs: process: submitting-patches: clarify imperative mood suggestion Ahmad Fatoum
2024-12-20 9:09 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] docs: process: submitting-patches: split canonical patch format section Ahmad Fatoum
2024-12-30 18:38 ` Jonathan Corbet
2024-12-20 9:09 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] docs: process: submitting-patches: clarify imperative mood suggestion Ahmad Fatoum
2024-12-30 18:40 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-01-06 14:51 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-06 14:57 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-01-06 15:02 ` Ahmad Fatoum [this message]
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=cc7f07e2-437a-4be5-9e11-cd55d481fcb7@pengutronix.de \
--to=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=Frank.li@nxp.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).