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  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1910240956450.4479@hadrien>
Date:   Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:58:32 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc:     cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@....com.cn>,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>,
        Xue Zhihong <xue.zhihong@....com.cn>,
        Zhong Shiqi <zhong.shiqi@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] coccicheck: support $COCCI being defined as a
 directory



On Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:

> > Second the commit log could be more concise as:
>
> I like your desire for choosing a more appropriate commit message.
>
>
> > Allow defining COCCI as a directory that contains .cocci files.
>
> I would prefer to concentrate the patch subject on other information.
>
>
> > In general, at least in simple cases, it is not necessary to mention the
> > name of the file you are modifying in the comit log, because one can see
> > that just below from looking at the diffstat and the patch.
>
> This view can be reasonable. - How does it fit to the usual requirement
> for the specification of a “subsystem” (or “prefix”) according to the
> canonical patch format?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=13b86bc4cd648eae69fdcf3d04b2750c76350053#n656

Huh?  I was talking about the log message, not the subject line.  Likewise
"Allow defining..." was not proposed as a subject line, but as the log
message.  With that degree of orientation, I think one can look at the
code and figure out what the intent is.  At least if one knows the meaning
of -d.

julia

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ