[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1707102054390.26125@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 20:57:08 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] HID for 4.13
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jikos/hid.git for-linus
>
> I've pulled this, but looking at the thing, I absolutely _hate_ your
> merge commits.
>
> They have no commit messages! They look like this:
>
> Merge branches 'for-4.13/ish' and 'for-4.13/ite' into for-linus
>
> Conflicts:
> drivers/hid/hid-core.c
>
> which doesn't tell anybody anything.
>
> Please. If you can't make a message for a merge, don't do the merge.
> Send me the separate branches instead.
>
> Or just write useful merge messages.
>
> It's possible that you're running some truly ancient git version that
> didn't start an editor by default for merges. If so, upgrade your git
> install.
>
> Either way, it's not ok to do merges without explanations. We have
> higher standards for kernel history than that.
Yeah, point taken. I usually have a lot of small-to-tiny topic branches,
where I myself consider even the name of the branch often descriptive
enough; but I agree that this might not be the case for someone else
reviewing the merge.
Will continue with my current workflow and I'll increase the verbosity of
the merge logs.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists