summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/SubmittingPatches')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/SubmittingPatches69
1 files changed, 39 insertions, 30 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
index 4515cab519..55287d72e0 100644
--- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
+++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
@@ -3,8 +3,9 @@ Submitting Patches
== Guidelines
-Here are some guidelines for people who want to contribute their code
-to this software.
+Here are some guidelines for people who want to contribute their code to this
+software. There is also a link:MyFirstContribution.html[step-by-step tutorial]
+available which covers many of these same guidelines.
[[base-branch]]
=== Decide what to base your work on.
@@ -18,7 +19,7 @@ change is relevant to.
base your work on the tip of the topic.
* A new feature should be based on `master` in general. If the new
- feature depends on a topic that is in `pu`, but not in `master`,
+ feature depends on a topic that is in `seen`, but not in `master`,
base your work on the tip of that topic.
* Corrections and enhancements to a topic not yet in `master` should
@@ -27,7 +28,7 @@ change is relevant to.
into the series.
* In the exceptional case that a new feature depends on several topics
- not in `master`, start working on `next` or `pu` privately and send
+ not in `master`, start working on `next` or `seen` privately and send
out patches for discussion. Before the final merge, you may have to
wait until some of the dependent topics graduate to `master`, and
rebase your work.
@@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ change is relevant to.
these parts should be based on their trees.
To find the tip of a topic branch, run `git log --first-parent
-master..pu` and look for the merge commit. The second parent of this
+master..seen` and look for the merge commit. The second parent of this
commit is the tip of the topic branch.
[[separate-commits]]
@@ -116,10 +117,13 @@ If in doubt which identifier to use, run `git log --no-merges` on the
files you are modifying to see the current conventions.
[[summary-section]]
-It's customary to start the remainder of the first line after "area: "
-with a lower-case letter. E.g. "doc: clarify...", not "doc:
-Clarify...", or "githooks.txt: improve...", not "githooks.txt:
-Improve...".
+The title sentence after the "area:" prefix omits the full stop at the
+end, and its first word is not capitalized unless there is a reason to
+capitalize it other than because it is the first word in the sentence.
+E.g. "doc: clarify...", not "doc: Clarify...", or "githooks.txt:
+improve...", not "githooks.txt: Improve...". But "refs: HEAD is also
+treated as a ref" is correct, as we spell `HEAD` in all caps even when
+it appears in the middle of a sentence.
[[meaningful-message]]
The body should provide a meaningful commit message, which:
@@ -208,7 +212,7 @@ send them as replies to either an additional "cover letter" message
(see below), the first patch, or the respective preceding patch.
If your log message (including your name on the
-Signed-off-by line) is not writable in ASCII, make sure that
+`Signed-off-by` trailer) is not writable in ASCII, make sure that
you send off a message in the correct encoding.
WARNING: Be wary of your MUAs word-wrap
@@ -228,7 +232,7 @@ previously sent.
The `git format-patch` command follows the best current practice to
format the body of an e-mail message. At the beginning of the
patch should come your commit message, ending with the
-Signed-off-by: lines, and a line that consists of three dashes,
+`Signed-off-by` trailers, and a line that consists of three dashes,
followed by the diffstat information and the patch itself. If
you are forwarding a patch from somebody else, optionally, at
the beginning of the e-mail message just before the commit
@@ -289,25 +293,24 @@ identify them), to solicit comments and reviews.
:git-ml: footnote:[The mailing list: git@vger.kernel.org]
After the list reached a consensus that it is a good idea to apply the
-patch, re-send it with "To:" set to the maintainer{current-maintainer} and "cc:" the
-list{git-ml} for inclusion.
+patch, re-send it with "To:" set to the maintainer{current-maintainer}
+and "cc:" the list{git-ml} for inclusion. This is especially relevant
+when the maintainer did not heavily participate in the discussion and
+instead left the review to trusted others.
Do not forget to add trailers such as `Acked-by:`, `Reviewed-by:` and
`Tested-by:` lines as necessary to credit people who helped your
-patch.
+patch, and "cc:" them when sending such a final version for inclusion.
[[sign-off]]
-=== Certify your work by adding your "Signed-off-by: " line
+=== Certify your work by adding your `Signed-off-by` trailer
-To improve tracking of who did what, we've borrowed the
-"sign-off" procedure from the Linux kernel project on patches
-that are being emailed around. Although core Git is a lot
-smaller project it is a good discipline to follow it.
+To improve tracking of who did what, we ask you to certify that you
+wrote the patch or have the right to pass it on under the same license
+as ours, by "signing off" your patch. Without sign-off, we cannot
+accept your patches.
-The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for
-the patch, which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have
-the right to pass it on as an open-source patch. The rules are
-pretty simple: if you can certify the below D-C-O:
+If (and only if) you certify the below D-C-O:
[[dco]]
.Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
@@ -337,23 +340,29 @@ d. I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
this project or the open source license(s) involved.
____
-then you just add a line saying
+you add a "Signed-off-by" trailer to your commit, that looks like
+this:
....
Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <random@developer.example.org>
....
-This line can be automatically added by Git if you run the git-commit
-command with the -s option.
+This line can be added by Git if you run the git-commit command with
+the -s option.
-Notice that you can place your own Signed-off-by: line when
+Notice that you can place your own `Signed-off-by` trailer when
forwarding somebody else's patch with the above rules for
D-C-O. Indeed you are encouraged to do so. Do not forget to
place an in-body "From: " line at the beginning to properly attribute
the change to its true author (see (2) above).
+This procedure originally came from the Linux kernel project, so our
+rule is quite similar to theirs, but what exactly it means to sign-off
+your patch differs from project to project, so it may be different
+from that of the project you are accustomed to.
+
[[real-name]]
-Also notice that a real name is used in the Signed-off-by: line. Please
+Also notice that a real name is used in the `Signed-off-by` trailer. Please
don't hide your real name.
[[commit-trailers]]
@@ -423,7 +432,7 @@ help you find out who they are.
and cooked further and eventually graduates to `master`.
In any time between the (2)-(3) cycle, the maintainer may pick it up
-from the list and queue it to `pu`, in order to make it easier for
+from the list and queue it to `seen`, in order to make it easier for
people play with it without having to pick up and apply the patch to
their trees themselves.
@@ -434,7 +443,7 @@ their trees themselves.
master. `git pull --rebase` will automatically skip already-applied
patches, and will let you know. This works only if you rebase on top
of the branch in which your patch has been merged (i.e. it will not
- tell you if your patch is merged in pu if you rebase on top of
+ tell you if your patch is merged in `seen` if you rebase on top of
master).
* Read the Git mailing list, the maintainer regularly posts messages