Re: [RESEND][PATCH] bug: Exclude non-BUG/WARN exceptions from report_bug()

[Kalle Valo]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> My question would be, will the existing automated systems that parse
>> the "PATCH" subject deal with a non-whitespaced suffix like this?
>
> Hmm. Maybe just space them out. That's what networking already does,
> ie you'll see things like
>
>     [PATCH net-next v3 0/5] patch description here
>
>     [PATCH net] some-patch-description
>
> in subject lines. Maybe we can just encourage that format in general.
>
> And yes, I agree, for when the targets are obvious, this clearly isn't
> needed. And often they are.
>
> So this would still likely be the exception rather than the rule, but
> it would be a lot more obvious than hiding a one-liner commentary deep
> in the middle of the email.

At least for me (as the wireless-drivers maintainer) this would be a
major improvement as it's not always clear to which to tree a patch
should be applied and it would save unnecessary ping pong when I need to
ask which tree is the patch going to. I think few times I have even
accidentally applied a patch which Dave has already applied to the net tree
because of the target tree was not clearly marked.

So at least I would very much welcome having this documented somewhere
in Documentation so that I can start convincing people to use it more :)

-- 
Kalle Valo