[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whqR7T_UuKX0JvOFK48RdiViOTPkNxxfjwh70FxjoxE0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 11:09:58 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 updates for 5.5
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 4:53 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>
> * Direct I/O via iomap (required the iomap-for-next branch from Darrick
> as a prereq).
I appreciate you telling me this, but why didn't you say anything at
all in the merge?
Ted, this merge commit message is simply not acceptable:
Merge branch 'iomap-for-next' into mb/dio
That's literally all you wrote about the iomap merge.
Not ok.
Merges are commits too. And merges need commit messages too. They need
an explanation of what they do - and why - the same way a normal
commit does.
You wouldn't make a one-liner "Do this" message for a regular commit
that has big implications. Why do you think it's ok for a merge
commit?
When you merge something, the individual commits that get pulled in
hopefully have their own explanations for each individual change -
otherwise you definitely shouldn't merge them. So the merge doesn't
need to replicate all of that.
But the merge itself still needs a "why am I merging these commits" explanation.
We pride ourselves on good commit messages. But that merge commit
message is pure and utter garbage.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists