From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756455AbZCAAqm (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:46:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755123AbZCAAqf (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:46:35 -0500 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:2753 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755092AbZCAAqe (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:46:34 -0500 Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 00:46:19 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Theodore Tso , Stefan Richter , Andy Whitcroft , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20090301004618.GA12909@sirena.org.uk> References: <49A942F6.3020600@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090228155841.GA15127@sirena.org.uk> <49A962F8.30609@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090228164627.GC15127@sirena.org.uk> <49A97563.6040906@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090228175218.GA4606@sirena.org.uk> <49A98F93.5030206@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090228210223.GA23191@sirena.org.uk> <49A9C252.50204@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20090301001829.GA10751@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090301001829.GA10751@mit.edu> X-Cookie: Beware of Bigfoot! User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.41.28.43 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on empty commit log bodies X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:14:11 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 07:18:29PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > Just to shut up checkpatch, I'm going to feel the urge to shake a > checkpatch maintainer warmly by the throat. > Sometimes, all that is needed is: > ------------ > ext4: Fix spelling error: successfull > > Signed-off-by: "Trivial Patch Submitter" > ------------ As I've said already I pretty much agree with this. The reason I sent the patch was that sending changelogs like that for trivial changes is getting me negative feedback and I'm seeing other comments about "unchangeloged patches" on the lists so I'm pretty sure it's not just something I'm doing. I'm not saying I'm always blameless here but when people are using terms like like "unchangeloged" it really does suggest that one line changelogs are just considered not to have changelogs. Some consistency would be good here.