lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 11:09:58 -0800 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 updates for 5.5 On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 4:53 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote: > > * Direct I/O via iomap (required the iomap-for-next branch from Darrick > as a prereq). I appreciate you telling me this, but why didn't you say anything at all in the merge? Ted, this merge commit message is simply not acceptable: Merge branch 'iomap-for-next' into mb/dio That's literally all you wrote about the iomap merge. Not ok. Merges are commits too. And merges need commit messages too. They need an explanation of what they do - and why - the same way a normal commit does. You wouldn't make a one-liner "Do this" message for a regular commit that has big implications. Why do you think it's ok for a merge commit? When you merge something, the individual commits that get pulled in hopefully have their own explanations for each individual change - otherwise you definitely shouldn't merge them. So the merge doesn't need to replicate all of that. But the merge itself still needs a "why am I merging these commits" explanation. We pride ourselves on good commit messages. But that merge commit message is pure and utter garbage. Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists