[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160223103253.GE5273@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:32:53 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@...ox.com>,
Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>, git@...r.kernel.org,
ying.huang@...el.com, philip.li@...el.com, julie.du@...el.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/1] format-patch: add an option to record base tree
info
So this is the format for the first patch?
base commit: 0233b800c838ddda41db318ee396320b3c21a560
Can we change it to include the name of the public tree we are starting
from?
applies-to: 0233b800c838 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git#master
Of course, my absolute prefered format would be:
applies-to: net-next 0233b800c838
I don't think that's possible though? I often write that sort of a line
in my emails to Dave already.
Fengguang was suggesting something like this if we have to include
unmerged patches:
applies-to: net-next 0233b800c838
private patchset 1
private patchset 2
I don't think git knows what a patchset is. We would have to include
the subject line for each unmerged patch. I think we should only do
that if there is a cover letter, otherwise the it's too noisy.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists