[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E4985DB.20109@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:47:23 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
CC: Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: add Internal-reference-ID: patch tag
On 08/15/2011 01:23 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:27:53 -0700 H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> On 08/15/2011 10:39 AM, Mike Waychison wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would like to see the <id@...er> format I mentioned.
>>>
>>> Is there a middle ground if we say:
>>>
>>> Internal-reference-ID: <arbitrarytextforid@...er>
>>>
>>> so
>>>
>>> Internal-reference-ID: <2011.0729.id1@...nlap>
>>> Internal-reference-ID: <bug-45322143@...gle>
>>>
>>
>> Personally I don't care if they are separate lines or all on the same line.
>
> I don't understand how that answers Mike's question...
>
Then I don't understand the question.
I proposed:
Internal-reference-ID: <2011.0729.id1@...nlap> <33999@...gle>
Mike proposed:
Internal-reference-ID: <2011.0729.id1@...nlap>
Internal-reference-ID: <bug-45322143@...gle>
The only difference I see is if they are on the same line, which I don't
personally care about.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists