On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 10:00:36 +0200
Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote:

> Dear Kim Phillips,
> 
> In message <20090821174533.d26d421b.kim.phill...@freescale.com> you wrote:
> >
> > > > Heiko Schocher (1):
> > > >       mpc83xx: add missing CSCONFIG_ODT_WR_CFG for 832x CPUs
> > > 
> > > Umm.... please do not edit the Subject line of the commit messages.
> > > At least, please tell me explicitly if you do. The reason is that I
> > > cannot find any such patch anywhere - because the real Subject was
> > > "83xx: add..."
> > 
> > sounds like I shouldn't be prefixing mpc83xx patch subjects with
> > mpc83xx for consistency.  I'd rather keep that habit myself, but if
> > that's what you prefer..
> 
> I like consistency, too. But for me it's also important to be able
> to associate commits to the actual postings on the mailing list. The
> best solution would be if the sumbitters could already use such
> Subject: lines.
> 
> Maybe we should formulate such a rule / requirement / wish ?

you can try, but most of the patches that come in for 83xx are fine,
just without that 'mpc83xx: ' up front (esp. the 'mpc' part).

Personally, I'm in favour of dynamic learning and adapting of our
contributors, rather than establishing hard rules - I don't want to
have to reject a patch for something so easy to fix.

Might I suggest we use a more sophisticated patch tracking tool than
sorting inboxes, such as patchworks?

Kim
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to