public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: "Richard Earnshaw \(lists\)" <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>
Cc: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>,
	 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
	 Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>,
	 gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,  GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, v2] wwwdocs: e-mail subject lines for contributions
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:41:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <mpty2tzqxwu.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d99536c-c1af-b4ea-17b0-23b44a3bf8b7@arm.com> (Richard	Earnshaw's message of "Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:50:13 +0000")

"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com> writes:
> On 21/01/2020 17:20, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 1/21/20 10:40 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>> On 21/01/2020 15:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:33:22PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw (lists) 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>
>>>>> Glibc use "[BZ #nnnn]" - obviously BZ becomes PR, but after that, 
>>>>> I'm not
>>>>> too worried.  I'd be happy with [PR #nnnn], but if folk want 
>>>>> something else,
>>>>> please say so quickly...
>>>>
>>>> [PR 12345] or [PR #12345] is bad, because the bugzilla won't 
>>>> underline it,
>>>> it needs to be either PR12345 word, or PR component/12345 .
>>>
>>> ok, lets go with [PRnnnn] then.
>> 
>> Doesn't this use of [] have the same problem with git am?
>
> No, because only 'leading' [] blocks are removed - git mailinfo --help
>
>> 
>> My summaries are often describing the bug I'm fixing, i.e.
>> 
>> [PATCH] PR c++/91476 - anon-namespace reference temp clash between TUs.
>> 
>> which is also the first line of my ChangeLog entry.  I think you are 
>> proposing
>> 
>> [COMMITTED] c++: Fix anon-namespace reference temp clash between TUs 
>> (PR91476)
>> 
>> which can no longer be shared with the ChangeLog.
>> 
>
> I was trying to unify this with glibc.  They specify the bug number at 
> the end of the line.
>
> We can diverge if it's generally felt to be important, but details like 
> this create needless friction for folk working in both communities.

+1 for "component: Summary [PRnnnnn]" FWIW.

PR bz-component/nnnnn works well for C++.  The problem is that so many
other PRs come under tree-optimization and rtl-optimization, which
eat up a lot of subject line characters without narrowing things down
very much.  "cselib: ... [PRnnnnn]" is both shorter and more descriptive
than "PR rtl-optimization/nnnnn - ....", etc.

Same idea for "PR target/nnnnn - ...": you then need to say which target
you mean in the main summary, whereas "aarch64: .... [PRnnnnn]" makes
it easier to keep the main summary short.

Maybe that's just a problem with the bz classification though...

Richard

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-01-22 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <c3928f40-2d71-fb5b-f2e0-3878ac88a2b7@arm.com>
     [not found] ` <alpine.LSU.2.21.2001191425160.739@anthias.pfeifer.com>
     [not found]   ` <353faf3e-bf43-eb4d-542d-45a53dce77b2@arm.com>
2020-01-21 15:40     ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-21 16:03       ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-01-21 16:14         ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-21 16:38           ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-01-21 16:43             ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-21 19:27               ` Jason Merrill
2020-01-22  3:46                 ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-22 10:00                   ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-01-22 13:50                     ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-22 13:54                       ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-01-22 17:41                   ` Richard Sandiford [this message]
2020-01-22 17:45                     ` Marek Polacek
2020-01-22 17:50                       ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-22  9:07       ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-01-22 16:05         ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-01-22 16:37           ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-01-22 18:49       ` [PATCH, v3] " Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 11:41         ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 11:54           ` Alexander Monakov
2020-02-03 11:59             ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 12:51               ` Alexander Monakov
2020-02-03 14:11                 ` Jason Merrill
2020-02-03 15:13                   ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 15:15                     ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 13:54             ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-03 14:00               ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 14:13                 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-02-03 15:05                   ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 16:12                     ` Andrew Clayton
2020-02-03 17:17                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-03 17:19                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-03 17:31                 ` Michael Matz
2020-02-03 17:36                   ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 17:49                     ` Michael Matz
2020-02-03 17:54                       ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-02-03 18:20                         ` Michael Matz
2020-02-03 19:48                           ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-03 17:54                       ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-02-03 18:09                         ` Michael Matz
2020-02-04 10:41                           ` Andrew Stubbs
2020-02-03 18:57                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-03 18:03                       ` Joseph Myers
2020-02-03 17:34                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-02-27 13:38           ` Nathan Sidwell
2020-03-02 13:01             ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2020-03-02 13:35               ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-03-02 14:31               ` Nathan Sidwell
2020-03-02 14:41                 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-03-02 15:22                   ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)

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=mpty2tzqxwu.fsf@arm.com \
    --to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
    --cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gerald@pfeifer.com \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=jason@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).