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
