[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgJx0FKq5FUP85Os1HjTPds4B3aQwumnRJDp+XHEbVjfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:22:54 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL afs: Development for 5.4
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:09 AM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Here's a set of patches for AFS. The first three are trivial, deleting
> unused symbols and rolling out a wrapper function.
Pulled.
However, I was close to unpulling it again. It has a merge commit with
this merge message:
Merge remote-tracking branch 'net/master' into afs-next
and that simply is not acceptable.
Commit messages need to explain the commit. The same is even more true
of merges!
In a regular commit, you can at least look at the patch and say "ok,
that change is obvious and self-explanatory".
In a merge commit, the _only_ explanation you have is basically the
commit message, and when the commit message is garbage, the merge is
garbage.
If you can't explain why you are doing a merge, then you shouldn't do
the merge. It's that simple.
And if you can't be bothered to write the explanation down, I'm not
sure I can be bothered to then pull the end result.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists