Re: [docs] [PATCH] contributor-guide/submit-changes: encourage patch version changelogs

Trevor Woerner
2025-03-21T16:51:41Z

On Tue 2025-03-18 @ 09:08:12 AM, Antonin Godard wrote:
> Hi Trevor,
>
> On Tue Mar 18, 2025 at 4:56 AM CET, Trevor Woerner via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> > Add a section after the 'git format-patch' information encouraging developers
> > to add patch version changelogs to their patch updates.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > .../contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst | 32 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst b/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst
> > index 0675aac984cf..5ade6ba5cdef 100644
> > --- a/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst
> > +++ b/documentation/contributor-guide/submit-changes.rst
> > @@ -776,6 +776,38 @@ argument to ``git format-patch`` with a version number::
> >
> > git format-patch -v2 <ref-branch>
> >
> > +
> > +After generating updated patches (v2, v3, and so on) via ``git
>
> s/via/with/? (to use simpler phrasings)

Yes, I too ran vale against this text. I saw that suggestion and chose to
ignore it ;-)

> > +format-patch``, ideally developers will add a patch version changelog
> > +to each patch that describes what has changed between each revision of
> > +the patch. Add patch version changelogs after the ``---`` marker in the
> > +patch, indicating that this information is part of this patch, but is not
> > +suitable for inclusion in the commit message (i.e. the git history) itself.
> > +Providing a patch version changelog makes it easier for maintainers and
> > +reviewers to succinctly understand what changed in all versions of the
> > +patch, without having to consult alternate sources of information, such as
> > +searching through messages on a mailing list. For example::
> > +
> > + <patch title>
> > +
> > + <commit message>
> > +
> > + <SoB/etc lines>
>
> Maybe write "<Signed-off-by/other trailers>" so there is no doubt about the
> meaning of SoB?

Okay.

> > + ---
> > + changes in v4:
> > + - provide a clearer commit message
> > + - fix spelling mistakes
> > +
> > + changes in v3:
> > + - replace func() to use other_func() instead
> > +
> > + changes in v2:
> > + - added
>
> "added return value check for func"?
> to give a more concrete example

It's not uncommon for the v1 series to have N patches, and the v2 series to
have >N patches; in which case one or more patches were added in v2. This
isn't a really bad commit log where the author forgets to say what they added,
it's a message saying "this patch was added in v2".

> I think it would also be nice to also instrict to give the link to the previous
> patch but that might go a bit too far if done manually each time.

That's not something I've seen often, but it could be community-specific.

> > + ---
> > + <diffstat output>
> > +
> > + <unified diff>
> > +
> > Lastly please ensure that you also test your revised changes. In particular
> > please don't just edit the patch file written out by ``git format-patch`` and
> > resend it.
>
> Otherwise this looks good to me, these are simply suggestions.
>
> Thank you,
> Antonin
>
> --
> Antonin Godard, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com