public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>, gcc mailing list <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: where is PRnnnn required again?
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 16:58:50 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be7bb29-c830-05b9-99e5-7e54966d4b5c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH6eHdQe4t=_HDrnDZj+gqy9bWVZNtaF7ZLYJ88QgV=AjSPfhQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/7/21 4:24 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 7 Jul 2021, 23:18 Martin Sebor, <msebor@gmail.com 
> <mailto:msebor@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 7/7/21 3:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>      > I'm not sure why you keep hitting so many issues; git addlog
>     takes care of
>      > this stuff for me and I've had no trouble pushing my patches.  Is
>     there
>      > a reason you don't use it also?
> 
>     I probably have a completely different workflow.  Git addlog isn't
>     a git command (is it some sort of a GCC extension?), and what I put
>     in the subject of my emails is almost never the same thing as what
>     I put in the commit message. 
> 
> 
> Why not? Why is it useful to write two different explanations of the patch?

Sometimes, maybe.  I don't really think about it too much.  I'm not
the only one who does it.  But what bearing does what we put in
the subject of our patch submissions have on this discussion?

You may have one way of doing things and others another.  Yours may
even be better/more streamlined, I don't know.  That doesn't mean
our tooling should make things more difficult for the the rest of us.

Martin

  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-07 22:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-06 21:20 Martin Sebor
2021-07-06 21:36 ` Marek Polacek
2021-07-06 21:44   ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-06 22:09     ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-07-07 16:39       ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 20:42         ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-07-07 21:35           ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 21:53             ` Marek Polacek
2021-07-07 22:18               ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 22:24                 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-07-07 22:58                   ` Martin Sebor [this message]
2021-07-07 23:03                     ` David Malcolm
2021-07-08  8:26                     ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-07-08 18:58                       ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 22:15             ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-07-07 23:38               ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 17:51 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-07-07 19:01   ` Martin Sebor
2021-07-07 21:01   ` Jason Merrill

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4be7bb29-c830-05b9-99e5-7e54966d4b5c@gmail.com \
    --to=msebor@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jwakely.gcc@gmail.com \
    --cc=polacek@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).