![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Daniel Phillips wrote: > >>In that case, a nice refinement is to put the sequence number at the end of >>the subject line so patch sequences don't interleave: > > > No. That makes it unsortable, and also much harder to pick put which part > of the subject line is the explanation, and which part is just metadata > for me. > > So my prefernce is _overwhelmingly_ for the format that Andrew uses (which > is partly explained by the fact that I am used to it, but also by the fact > that I've asked for Andrew to make trivial changes to match my usage). > > That canonical format is: > > Subject: [PATCH 001/123] [<area>:] <explanation> > > together with the first line of the body being a > > From: Original Author <origa@email.com> Nod. For future reference, people can refer to http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html and/or http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/tpp.txt Jeff - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-04-08 05:41 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||