Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: best practices for using Link trailers

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:42:11 -0400
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> index 64739968afa6..57ffa553c21e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst
> @@ -375,14 +375,26 @@ following tag ordering scheme:
>     For referring to an email on LKML or other kernel mailing lists,
>     please use the lore.kernel.org redirector URL::
>  
> -     https://lore.kernel.org/r/email-message@id
> +     Link: https://lore.kernel.org/email-message@id
>  
> -   The kernel.org redirector is considered a stable URL, unlike other email
> -   archives.
> +   This URL should be used when referring to relevant mailing list
> +   resources, related patch sets, or other notable discussion threads.
> +   A convenient way to associate Link trailers with the accompanying
> +   message is to use markdown-like bracketed notation, for example::
>  
> -   Maintainers will add a Link tag referencing the email of the patch
> -   submission when they apply a patch to the tip tree. This tag is useful
> -   for later reference and is also used for commit notifications.
> +     A similar approach was attempted before as part of a different
> +     effort [1], but the initial implementation caused too many
> +     regressions [2], so it was backed out and reimplemented.
> +
> +     Link: https://lore.kernel.org/some-msgid@here # [1]
> +     Link: https://bugzilla.example.org/bug/12345  # [2]
> +
> +   When using the ``Link:`` trailer to indicate the provenance of the
> +   patch, you should use the dedicated ``patch.msgid.link`` domain. This
> +   makes it possible for automated tooling to establish which link leads
> +   to the original patch submission. For example::
> +
> +     Link: https://patch.msgid.link/patch-source-msgid@here

Hmm, I mentioned this in the other thread, but I also like the fact
that my automated script uses the list that it was Cc'd to. That is, if
it Cc'd linux-trace-kernel, if not, if it Cc'd linux-trace-devel, it
adds that, otherwise it uses lkml. Now, I could just make the lkml use
the patch-source-msgid instead.

This does give me some information about what the focus of the patch
was. Hmm, maybe I could just make it:

  Link: https://patch.msgid.link/patch-source-msgid@here # linux-trace-devel

Would anyone have an issue with that?

-- Steve


>  
>  Please do not use combined tags, e.g. ``Reported-and-tested-by``, as
>  they just complicate automated extraction of tags.
>