From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C861B398 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:22:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 722F7180C; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 07:22:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 07:22:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=pqib1JtnwT1jx133bpf6Ix7TxLe9zYgDFiiMPelvqYI=; b=Q+44gDJCdOR+ zq1PsY4pUSCMZdPyPzaCaubx1cTtXyZVCg3N6pD9Ht2Bj8bx3k2NzdATVr6qsfmd TkC6HaMgJgl9SCvRSHnyPNqCDTS3O522WzisLxMayS5nlqdRsEZzJF7tbdaLvMFB yDl1SV5QyJQIC29BoycBBu3Qw65H/rU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=pqib1JtnwT1jx133bpf6Ix7TxLe9zYgDFiiMPelvq YI=; b=vmI1hQOSpm7B+4/O/RkaA49OpXBQcQVs7TO4javrKFIxgOMUo8bHFrNQF 4dmE+xA/YgzJpw2CIGjMn1fve0KmocKgMl2V7bOeb4dRjLJR4EjfAiOa7Z0hZqDy fjWE47hASsgb8nvEq9DnKJaM/I3XwdD25miyKNhrRx06rDnUc3yj9WnxHuemU7zK pnOWYSME3MrXlPceEaEvF9iVWqTIObuiUXru2qEs7ESXrFEY1dhMyuQitAVCAAB9 NI98DvyoBqlXtCpzxekZZqsLrGJrJt4lc63qjGX5Gisf03EhWtpORgzFcZaEVE3C 0PX9P5xK8muJjtEIlNvAIuIj+OD5w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrjeeggdeflecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfh gggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceo thhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfe drudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhho nhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5E3D4E4668; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 07:22:39 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org, Qi Zhang , david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:22:37 +0100 Message-ID: <2531806.X9HWgi9ZUd@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190130113527.GD157424@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20190129153052.38634-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <2527672.4HATR1JlfD@xps> <20190130113527.GD157424@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] devtools: check commit log fixes syntax X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:22:43 -0000 30/01/2019 12:35, Bruce Richardson: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:31:21PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 30/01/2019 12:29, Bruce Richardson: > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:15:44AM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > > On 1/29/2019 8:41 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > 29/01/2019 16:30, Ferruh Yigit: > > > > >> Fixes line commit id length defined as 12 in fixline alias: > > > > >> fixline = log -1 --abbrev=12 --format='Fixes: %h (\"%s\")%nCc: %ae' > > > > >> > > > > >> Check if the Fixes line commit id length matches the defined value. > > > > > > > > > > This check was missing on purpose, in order to not be too strict. > > > > > I think it's OK if the length of the SHA1 is not always the same. > > > > > > > > That is OK, if we don't want to be strict on this, I will update patch as rejected. > > > > > > > I think having this check is still good. It's not enforcing the rule, just > > > warning when violated. In 99% of cases this warning should be fixed IMHO, > > > especially if you guys are fixing these manually anyway. > > > > I don't fix it manually. I think SHA1 length has no importance. > > Why do you think it should be fixed? > > > Neatness and consistency. Since we provide on the site the expected syntax > for the fixes line, why not check for its use? OK, I'm not against the check.