From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 130103 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2020 15:05:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 129979 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jan 2020 15:05:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: us-smtp-1.mimecast.com Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (HELO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) (205.139.110.120) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 15:05:03 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1579619101; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=t/Zn1snSLUDx08aaM67XhzbVPbWWC7m5cw847xinlR8=; b=Bi3cAygnYTx/BdmuNFKmYMmrOQwgX/8y1pBO6ZnKQ8V3lyd/Fk3q+OyiUMl+U/6Nc1BCqL ln9QDM2i8GLLR5Ui31J/d6XM74mc/+DhBRx1HmAoWvS94SMAM0erpwzrL17R5nhHGP0T9s i0O5/7tvl1A/rRgSb/xwrZUQruaGJD0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-30-5llRqJNgOGuqfjvro-fsPg-1; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:04:46 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F999107ACCC; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 15:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-51.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.51]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D58E57DB5D; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 15:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 00LF4gWj014841; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:04:42 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 00LF4eMS014840; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:04:40 +0100 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 15:10:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" Cc: Gerald Pfeifer , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, GCC Development Subject: Re: [PATCH, v2] wwwdocs: e-mail subject lines for contributions Message-ID: <20200121150440.GX10088@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <353faf3e-bf43-eb4d-542d-45a53dce77b2@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg01339.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:52:00PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > [updated, following some comments from Gerald, main differences are > slight tweaks to the html markup and changing "email" to "e-mail"] >=20 > This patch proposes some new (additional) rules for email subject lines > when contributing to GCC. The goal is to make sure that, as far as > possible, the subject for a patch will form a good summary when the > message is committed to the repository if applied with 'git am'. Where > possible, I've tried to align these rules with those already in > use for glibc, so that the differences are minimal and only where > necessary. >=20 > Some things that differ from existing practice (at least by some people) > are: >=20 > - Use ':' rather than '[]' > - This is more git friendly and works with 'git am'. > - Put bug numbers at the end of the line rather than the beginning. > - The bug number is useful, but not as useful as the brief summary. > Also, use the shortened form, as the topic part is more usefully > conveyed in the proper topic field (see above). Some examples would be useful I'd say, e.g. it is unclear in what way you want the PR number to be appended, shall it be something: whatever words describe it PR12345 or something: whatever words describe it (PR12345) or something: whatever words describe it: PR12345 or something: whatever words describe it [PR12345] or something else? Also, it would be nice to stress that the PR long form should be in the ChangeLog and somewhere on the later lines of the commit message, I don't think we pick up the shorter form from the first line when it short form (I could be wrong, but e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/g:865257c447cc50f5819e9b53da83145f3c36c305 commit didn't make it into bugzilla). Jakub