On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:00 PM Randy Dunlap
> On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/. My
> > > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these
> > > quirks" out of existence. The evidence from this brief discussion
> > > that this might indeed happen.
> > I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating. Everyone
> > insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our
> > for not reading it. It's like those EULA things where there is more
> > text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
> Yes, agreed.
> > And the documentation doesn't help. For example, I knew people's
> > about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget. I say that if you
> > can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't
> > care that strongly.
> If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email
> subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO. E.g.,
> E: NuBus
Better make this a regex to deal with (net|net-next).
We could probably script populating MAINTAINERS with this using how it
is done manually: git log --oneline <dir>
I made a similar proposal nearly a decade ago to add a grammar
to MAINTAINERS sections for patch subject prefixes.