Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1519105 > unrolled thread

Re: [RESEND PATCH] regulator: pwm: fix syntax errors in the examples

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [RESEND PATCH] regulator: pwm: fix syntax errors in the examples Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-11-10 17:20 +0100
    Re: [RESEND PATCH] regulator: pwm: fix syntax errors in the examples Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-11-10 19:10 +0100

#1519105 — Re: [RESEND PATCH] regulator: pwm: fix syntax errors in the examples

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:25:27AM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote:
> While at it, clean up some other things as well.

This isn't a useful changelog, it's just saying that there's some
random changes for no reason.  Please make proper patches with
changelogs that explain them.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1519252

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 06:05:59PM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2016-11-10 17:18, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:25:27AM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote:

> >> While at it, clean up some other things as well.

> > This isn't a useful changelog, it's just saying that there's some
> > random changes for no reason.  Please make proper patches with
> > changelogs that explain them.

> It's a very uninteresting patch, I guess I made a changelog to match.
> But I can't help myself from asking a few qustions...

> Patch*es* and changelog*s*?

> Oh, you want me to split into a series of several patches? One for the
> quotes, one for the "../regultor/" removal, one for the empty
> comment removal and one for the s/pwm_reglator/pwm-regulator/ thing?

> Be careful what you ask for, you might get it...

The above is not a problem for me, indeed it's actually good as it makes
it *much* quicker and simpler for me to read the changes and figure out
if they all make sense and do what was intended.  The less the changelog
says about what the change is supposed to do and the more different
things the change does the more effort is required to work out if it's
sensible and the more chance there is of one of the changes blocking the
other ones.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web