Message ID | 87inraslrk.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable |
Headers | show |
On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > > powerpc fixes for 4.9 #6 > > Fixes marked for stable: > - Set missing wakeup bit in LPCR on POWER9 (Benjamin Herrenschmidt) > - Fix the early OPAL console wrappers (Oliver O'Halloran) > - Fixup kernel read only mapping (Aneesh Kumar K.V) > > Fixes for code merged this cycle: > - Fix missing CRCs, add more asm-prototypes.h declarations (Nicholas Piggin) Pulled, but I wanted to talk about your merge "summary". Your merge summaries seem to be entirely automatically generated, which makes them less than great. I can see all that stuff in the git tree already, just formatting it differently isn't all that useful. For something like this late-rc pull when there are only a couple of commits, the end result actually ends up looking almost like a summary and all I did was remove the names that don't add to the description (and are in the git commits). For some of the bigger pull requests, the summary is almost anything but, and the only real value-add is the grouping by subject area. I really prefer a _summary_. Something that is human-legible. So that when people read the merge commit log, they get an overview of what changed, not a list of the details. Again, when there are four commits, a "list of the details" pretty much works. So the reason I react to _this_ pull request is mainly that I have way more time to react to it during the late rc series than I do earlier in the cycle.. Linus
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes: > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote: >> >> powerpc fixes for 4.9 #6 >> >> Fixes marked for stable: >> - Set missing wakeup bit in LPCR on POWER9 (Benjamin Herrenschmidt) >> - Fix the early OPAL console wrappers (Oliver O'Halloran) >> - Fixup kernel read only mapping (Aneesh Kumar K.V) >> >> Fixes for code merged this cycle: >> - Fix missing CRCs, add more asm-prototypes.h declarations (Nicholas Piggin) > > Pulled, but I wanted to talk about your merge "summary". > > Your merge summaries seem to be entirely automatically generated, > which makes them less than great. I can see all that stuff in the git > tree already, just formatting it differently isn't all that useful. OK. The starting point is obviously an automatically generated list of commits, but I have been editing that a fair bit to drop boring commits and combine multiple commits into a single line, and then sort it by topic area etc. But obviously I'm not editing it enough, so I'll try to summarise it much more heavily. > For something like this late-rc pull when there are only a couple of > commits, the end result actually ends up looking almost like a summary > and all I did was remove the names that don't add to the description > (and are in the git commits). I actually do like to include the names, just to give people a bit of acknowledgment in the pull request, but I can drop them if you prefer. Or maybe I'll just include a credits section at the bottom of the tag with everyone's name once, and you can drop that from the commit? > For some of the bigger pull requests, the summary is almost anything > but, and the only real value-add is the grouping by subject area. > > I really prefer a _summary_. Something that is human-legible. So that > when people read the merge commit log, they get an overview of what > changed, not a list of the details. Right. cheers