Re: [PATCH] ata-piix: kerneldoc-error-on-ata_piixc.patch 2nd try
From: Randy Dunlap
Date: Mon Sep 25 2006 - 17:22:53 EST
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:37:38 +0200 Henne wrote:
> Jeff Garzik schrieb:
> > Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> I agree with all of these except #4. Maybe you can reconcile your
> >> preference with that in Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which
> >> contains:
> >> <quote>
> >> The canonical patch message body contains the following:
> >> - A "from" line specifying the patch author.
> >> </quote>
> >> A patch submitter should not need to know the patch receiver's
> >> personal preferences and vary patches based on those.
> > It's not a personal preference. It's all based on git-applymbox, pretty
> > much.
> > The SubmittingPatches doc should be updated to clarify that a From line
> > is not needed in the email body, if it is the same as the From line in
> > the RFC822 header.
It seems to be a small, simple matter of "not needed" vs. "allowed".
AFAIK, From: is always allowed but it is not needed if the From: mail
header matches the From: body text.
> > Jeff
> Thanks for pointing my nose on this guys! I'll keep that in mind when writing patches, but that from line
> should be discussed by the maintainers.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/