[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240625172727.3dd2ad67@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:27:27 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Carlos Bilbao
<carlos.bilbao.osdev@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo
Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ksummit@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: best practices for using Link
trailers
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:42:11 -0400
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> index 64739968afa6..57ffa553c21e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> @@ -375,14 +375,26 @@ following tag ordering scheme:
> For referring to an email on LKML or other kernel mailing lists,
> please use the lore.kernel.org redirector URL::
>
> - https://lore.kernel.org/r/email-message@id
> + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/email-message@id
>
> - The kernel.org redirector is considered a stable URL, unlike other email
> - archives.
> + This URL should be used when referring to relevant mailing list
> + resources, related patch sets, or other notable discussion threads.
> + A convenient way to associate Link trailers with the accompanying
> + message is to use markdown-like bracketed notation, for example::
>
> - Maintainers will add a Link tag referencing the email of the patch
> - submission when they apply a patch to the tip tree. This tag is useful
> - for later reference and is also used for commit notifications.
> + A similar approach was attempted before as part of a different
> + effort [1], but the initial implementation caused too many
> + regressions [2], so it was backed out and reimplemented.
> +
> + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/some-msgid@here # [1]
> + Link: https://bugzilla.example.org/bug/12345 # [2]
> +
> + When using the ``Link:`` trailer to indicate the provenance of the
> + patch, you should use the dedicated ``patch.msgid.link`` domain. This
> + makes it possible for automated tooling to establish which link leads
> + to the original patch submission. For example::
> +
> + Link: https://patch.msgid.link/patch-source-msgid@here
Hmm, I mentioned this in the other thread, but I also like the fact
that my automated script uses the list that it was Cc'd to. That is, if
it Cc'd linux-trace-kernel, if not, if it Cc'd linux-trace-devel, it
adds that, otherwise it uses lkml. Now, I could just make the lkml use
the patch-source-msgid instead.
This does give me some information about what the focus of the patch
was. Hmm, maybe I could just make it:
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/patch-source-msgid@here # linux-trace-devel
Would anyone have an issue with that?
-- Steve
>
> Please do not use combined tags, e.g. ``Reported-and-tested-by``, as
> they just complicate automated extraction of tags.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists