On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:58:54 +0530 "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com> wrote:

quoted text
> [*] BTW, the changelog/patch description of this commit demonstrates
> why it is a Bad Thing (tm) to have lengthy [PATCH 0/x] kind of mails
> (containing important technical details) preceding a patchset.
> 
> I can only guess as to what happened, but reading the archives of the
> original submission of this patchset on LKML, I think Andrew had to
> append the contents of the [0/3] mail to the git commit of the [1/3]
> patch (so as to not lose all those details and ensure that they got saved
> in the git history), with the result that most of the changelog of commit
> 866b04fccbf1 has nothing to do with that particular patch at all, but
> instead with other commits, that do not even touch that same file (!)
> 
> So guys, please keep "[0/x]" mails short and only as a non-technical
> introduction of the patchset. All relevant discussion must come in the
> other mails that contain the *real* patches.

yup.

Actually, when I do the copying of the [0/n] text into [1/n]'s changelog
I could add text to the changelogs of [2/n] ... [n/n] mentioning that
more details are in the preceding changelog.
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/