On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:58:54 +0530 "Satyam Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [*] BTW, the changelog/patch description of this commit demonstrates > why it is a Bad Thing (tm) to have lengthy [PATCH 0/x] kind of mails > (containing important technical details) preceding a patchset. > > I can only guess as to what happened, but reading the archives of the > original submission of this patchset on LKML, I think Andrew had to > append the contents of the [0/3] mail to the git commit of the [1/3] > patch (so as to not lose all those details and ensure that they got saved > in the git history), with the result that most of the changelog of commit > 866b04fccbf1 has nothing to do with that particular patch at all, but > instead with other commits, that do not even touch that same file (!) > > So guys, please keep "[0/x]" mails short and only as a non-technical > introduction of the patchset. All relevant discussion must come in the > other mails that contain the *real* patches. yup. Actually, when I do the copying of the [0/n] text into [1/n]'s changelog I could add text to the changelogs of [2/n] ... [n/n] mentioning that more details are in the preceding changelog. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
