Donate to e Foundation | Murena handsets with /e/OS | Own a part of Murena! Learn more

Commit e12d7462 authored by Alex Henrie's avatar Alex Henrie Committed by Jonathan Corbet
Browse files

SubmittingPatches: make Subject examples match the de facto standard 



The examples should better match what kernel developers actually expect,
so that they set a good example both for this project and for other
projects with similar development processes.

Signed-off-by: default avatarAlex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
parent 2b71920e

Documentation/SubmittingPatches

+4 −4
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -659,8 +659,8 @@ succinct and descriptive, but that is what a well-written summary 
should do.



The "summary phrase" may be prefixed by tags enclosed in square

brackets: "Subject: [PATCH tag] <summary phrase>".  The tags are not

considered part of the summary phrase, but describe how the patch

brackets: "Subject: [PATCH <tag>...] <summary phrase>".  The tags are

not considered part of the summary phrase, but describe how the patch

should be treated.  Common tags might include a version descriptor if

the multiple versions of the patch have been sent out in response to

comments (i.e., "v1, v2, v3"), or "RFC" to indicate a request for
@@ -672,8 +672,8 @@ the patch series. 


A couple of example Subjects:



    Subject: [patch 2/5] ext2: improve scalability of bitmap searching

    Subject: [PATCHv2 001/207] x86: fix eflags tracking

    Subject: [PATCH 2/5] ext2: improve scalability of bitmap searching

    Subject: [PATCH v2 01/27] x86: fix eflags tracking



The "from" line must be the very first line in the message body,

and has the form: