Re: [PATCH] Documentation: add Internal-reference-ID: patch tag

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 08/15/2011 02:00 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
> You said (on July-31):
> "Just to avoid namespace collisions, can we at least put the owner
> somewhere standardized, e.g. <2011.0729.id1@rdunlap>, <33999@google> and
> so on?"
> 
> I read that as 2 different patches & 2 different IDs, but this more
> recent line:
>> Internal-reference-ID: <2011.0729.id1@rdunlap> <33999@google>
> 
> would be for one patch with multiple IDs.
> 
>> Mike proposed:
>>
>> Internal-reference-ID: <2011.0729.id1@rdunlap>
>> Internal-reference-ID: <bug-45322143@google>
> 
> I think that Mike was just giving 2 examples (for 2 patches).  His proposal
> was simply for:
> Internal-reference-ID: <arbitrarytextforid@owner>
> 
> which matches your request fairly well AFAICT.
> 

Yes, that was my request.  But I also do observe that a single patch can
be tracked in multiple internal databases; for example, if
(hypothetically) Red Hat reports a bug to Google which ends up being
tracked in both bug databases, they may both want to tag the same patch.

> But if we are changing things, I think I prefer your other suggestion
> for the ID tag:  "Patch-ID".  I like it because it's shorter and
> easier to type.  :)

Agreed.

	-hpa

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/