Re: Fw: [PATCH 0/2] feat: checkpatch: prohibit Buglink: and warn about missing Link:
From: Joe Perches
Date: Tue Dec 06 2022 - 05:59:12 EST
On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 11:06 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 06.12.22 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
> > I'm not sure that "Patchwork:" is a reasonable prefix.
>
> /me neither
>
> > Is that documented anywhere?
>
> Couldn't find anything.
I knew that.
btw:
there are a _lot_ more uses of Link: with patchwork content than
Patchwork: prefix uses, so maybe just "Link:" should be accepted.
$ git log --format=email -i --grep "patchwork" | grep -i "patchwork" | \
cut -f1-3 -d'/' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -10
25789 Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org
7160 Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org
4109 Patchwork: https://patchwork.linux-mips.org
777 Patchwork: http://patchwork.linux-mips.org
372 Patchwork: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org
200 https://patchwork.kernel.org
154 Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org
116 [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org
76 https://patchwork.ozlabs.org
33 http://patchwork.ozlabs.org
> LGTM: I did some tests and it seem to do the right thing. Can we have
> your Signed-off-by: for that snippet?
It's your patch, I'm just suggesting...
cheers, Joe