On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:06:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The problem with git-commit is who's repo to add the hook to. I did > > attempt to do this by picking up each of linus' main releases and then > > using the git blame engine to attribute each "failure" to a particular > > commit. The plan then would be to send a nasty-gram to the committer > > about violations there-in. Wouldn't it be easier to pass each commit through checkpatch and email the committer if there is a problem? Each commit can be viewed as a standalone patch afterall; what does blame add? > The question is, whether we can convince the git developers to integrate > it. When a commit happens and checkpatch.pl is in scripts/, then run the > patch through it before doing the actual commit. Definitely the way to go. I'm pretty sure the Git guys would agree to distribute checkpatch.pl along with the existing pre-commit hook. So at least enabling checkpatch would be trivial for those convinced to use it. Sean - 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/
