From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Scott Preece <sepreece@gmail.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 08:11:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <470B1BA9.7080509@s5r6.in-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071009020750.GB4504@goodmis.org>
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> But for those that run test suites, they should be smart enough to put
> in more documentation into the change log to state how it was tested.
I disagree. The SCM changelog should contain _what_ a patch does and if
necessary _why_ it does so. The rest (e.g. the sign-off tag to state
that the licensing is alright, and any other tags) should have its
meaning sufficiently defined outside the changelog.
Remember what the SCM changelog is for, i.e. what we do with it after
commit.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== =-=- -=--=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-09 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-08 17:24 Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-08 17:31 ` Pekka Enberg
2007-10-08 17:37 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-08 17:45 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-08 18:01 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-10-08 18:06 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-08 18:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-10-08 18:34 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-10-08 19:04 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 19:26 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 20:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-10-09 2:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-09 6:11 ` Stefan Richter [this message]
2007-10-09 6:27 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-09 6:39 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-09 6:47 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:26 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:40 ` Roland Dreier
2007-10-08 19:35 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 20:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-08 21:38 ` Theodore Tso
2007-10-08 22:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-10-08 23:20 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-08 22:43 ` Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-08 23:06 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-09 3:34 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-10-08 23:30 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-10-09 10:28 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-08 23:42 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-09 0:05 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-09 16:49 ` Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-09 17:25 ` Roland Dreier
2007-10-10 0:06 ` David Chinner
2007-10-15 0:27 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-09 17:44 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-15 0:35 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-15 14:32 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-10 13:40 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 18:40 ` Mark Gross
2007-10-08 18:53 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 19:05 ` Al Viro
2007-10-08 19:08 ` Jonathan Corbet
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=470B1BA9.7080509@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--to=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=jengelh@computergmbh.de \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=sepreece@gmail.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®