linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Move arch/mips/philips to arch/mips/nxp

To: ralf@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: Move arch/mips/philips to arch/mips/nxp
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:00:58 -0700 (MST)
Cc: daniel.j.laird@nxp.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20080228094240.GD2750@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <64660ef00802270250sae0cd4of9512f13f400dfc6@mail.gmail.com> <20080228094240.GD2750@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
In message: <20080228094240.GD2750@linux-mips.org>
            Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> writes:
: The usual pointer here: http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/The_perfect_patch

Are the references to BitKeeper still relevant here?

>> Bear in mind that the Subject: of your email becomes a
>> globally-unique identifier for that patch. It propagates all the
>> way into BitKeeper. The Subject: may later be used in developer
------------^^^^^^^^^
>> discussions which refer to the patch. People will want to google
>> for the patch's Subject: to read discussion regarding that patch.

and

>> Do not refer to earlier patches when changelogging a new version of
>> a patch. It's not very useful to have a bitkeeper changelog which
-------------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^
>> says "OK, this fixes the things you mentioned yesterday". Each
>> iteration of the patch should contain a standalone changelog. This
>> implies that you need a patch management system which maintains
>> changelogs. See below.

and

>> Don't bother mentioning what version of the kernel the patch
>> applies to ("applies to 2.6.8-rc1"). This is not interesting
>> information - once the patch is in bitkeeper, of _course_ it
--------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^
>> applied, and it'll probably be merged into a later kernel than the
>> one which you wrote it for.

Warner

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>