On 15.11.2024 13:36, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > 11.11.24 14:05, Jan Beulich: > [..]>>> What exactly was it that Roger suggested? I don't think it was > what the patch >>>> does overall, but just _how_ it is being done? That makes quite a bit of a >>>> difference, as the former could be read as kind of an implicit ack to what >>>> is >>>> being done here (and also in the other patch). Issue is: I remain >>>> unconvinced >>>> that this conditionalizing is actually something we really want/need. >>> >>> about a half of this patch is what Roger suggested. These changes were >>> in a separate patch, which Roger suggested to be merged into other >>> patches. What tag should be put in this case then? >> >> The tag itself is fine, but could do with clarifying by way of attaching >> "# <brief>", like we also permit for R-b and A-b. Alternatively a post- >> commit-message remark would help during review (but notably not once the >> change would have been committed, e.g. for archaeologists). > > can the tag look like the following?: > > Suggested-by: Name <email> # domain.h,domain.c
Not sure what people would derive from that. How about Suggested-by: Name <email> # approach or Suggested-by: Name <email> # how, but not what or some such? Jan
