diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/SubmittingPatches')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 147 |
1 files changed, 103 insertions, 44 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches index c686f8646b..c6a5032912 100644 --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches @@ -7,17 +7,24 @@ Checklist (and a short version for the impatient): before committing - do not check in commented out code or unneeded files - the first line of the commit message should be a short - description and should skip the full stop + description (50 characters is the soft limit, see DISCUSSION + in git-commit(1)), and should skip the full stop - the body should provide a meaningful commit message, which: - - uses the imperative, present tense: "change", - not "changed" or "changes". - - includes motivation for the change, and contrasts - its implementation with previous behaviour - - if you want your work included in git.git, add a - "Signed-off-by: Your Name <you@example.com>" line to the - commit message (or just use the option "-s" when - committing) to confirm that you agree to the Developer's - Certificate of Origin + . explains the problem the change tries to solve, iow, what + is wrong with the current code without the change. + . justifies the way the change solves the problem, iow, why + the result with the change is better. + . alternate solutions considered but discarded, if any. + - describe changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz" + instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed + xyzzy to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase + to change its behaviour. + - try to make sure your explanation can be understood without + external resources. Instead of giving a URL to a mailing list + archive, summarize the relevant points of the discussion. + - add a "Signed-off-by: Your Name <you@example.com>" line to the + commit message (or just use the option "-s" when committing) + to confirm that you agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin - make sure that you have tests for the bug you are fixing - make sure that the test suite passes after your commit @@ -41,6 +48,7 @@ Checklist (and a short version for the impatient): maintainer (gitster@pobox.com) if (and only if) the patch is ready for inclusion. If you use git-send-email(1), please test it first by sending email to yourself. + - see below for instructions specific to your mailer Long version: @@ -53,6 +61,34 @@ But the patch submission requirements are a lot more relaxed here on the technical/contents front, because the core GIT is thousand times smaller ;-). So here is only the relevant bits. +(0) Decide what to base your work on. + +In general, always base your work on the oldest branch that your +change is relevant to. + + - A bugfix should be based on 'maint' in general. If the bug is not + present in 'maint', base it on 'master'. For a bug that's not yet + in 'master', find the topic that introduces the regression, and + 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', + base your work on the tip of that topic. + + - Corrections and enhancements to a topic not yet in 'master' should + be based on the tip of that topic. If the topic has not been merged + to 'next', it's alright to add a note to squash minor corrections + 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 + 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. + +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 +commit is the tip of the topic branch. (1) Make separate commits for logically separate changes. @@ -62,7 +98,10 @@ your commit head. Instead, always make a commit with complete commit message and generate a series of patches from your repository. It is a good discipline. -Describe the technical detail of the change(s). +Give an explanation for the change(s) that is detailed enough so +that people can judge if it is good thing to do, without reading +the actual patch text to determine how well the code does what +the explanation promises to do. If your description starts to get too long, that's a sign that you probably need to split up your commit to finer grained pieces. @@ -71,9 +110,8 @@ help reviewers check the patch, and future maintainers understand the code, are the most beautiful patches. Descriptions that summarise the point in the subject well, and describe the motivation for the change, the approach taken by the change, and if relevant how this -differs substantially from the prior version, can be found on Usenet -archives back into the late 80's. Consider it like good Netiquette, -but for code. +differs substantially from the prior version, are all good things +to have. Oh, another thing. I am picky about whitespaces. Make sure your changes do not trigger errors with the sample pre-commit hook shipped @@ -170,17 +208,16 @@ patch, format it as "multipart/signed", not a text/plain message that starts with '-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----'. That is not a text/plain, it's something else. -Note that your maintainer does not necessarily read everything -on the git mailing list. If your patch is for discussion first, -send it "To:" the mailing list, and optionally "cc:" him. If it -is trivially correct or after the list reached a consensus, send -it "To:" the maintainer and optionally "cc:" the list for -inclusion. - -Also note that your maintainer does not actively involve himself in -maintaining what are in contrib/ hierarchy. When you send fixes and -enhancements to them, do not forget to "cc: " the person who primarily -worked on that hierarchy in contrib/. +Unless your patch is a very trivial and an obviously correct one, +first send it with "To:" set to the mailing list, with "cc:" listing +people who are involved in the area you are touching (the output from +"git blame $path" and "git shortlog --no-merges $path" would help to +identify them), to solicit comments and reviews. 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 and optionally "cc:" the list for +inclusion. Do not forget to add trailers such as "Acked-by:", +"Reviewed-by:" and "Tested-by:" after your "Signed-off-by:" line as +necessary. (4) Sign your work @@ -237,12 +274,21 @@ the change to its true author (see (2) above). Also notice that a real name is used in the Signed-off-by: line. Please don't hide your real name. -Some people also put extra tags at the end. +If you like, you can put extra tags at the end: -"Acked-by:" says that the patch was reviewed by the person who -is more familiar with the issues and the area the patch attempts -to modify. "Tested-by:" says the patch was tested by the person -and found to have the desired effect. +1. "Reported-by:" is used to credit someone who found the bug that + the patch attempts to fix. +2. "Acked-by:" says that the person who is more familiar with the area + the patch attempts to modify liked the patch. +3. "Reviewed-by:", unlike the other tags, can only be offered by the + reviewer and means that she is completely satisfied that the patch + is ready for application. It is usually offered only after a + detailed review. +4. "Tested-by:" is used to indicate that the person applied the patch + and found it to have the desired effect. + +You can also create your own tag or use one that's in common usage +such as "Thanks-to:", "Based-on-patch-by:", or "Mentored-by:". ------------------------------------------------ An ideal patch flow @@ -519,12 +565,28 @@ Gmail GMail does not appear to have any way to turn off line wrapping in the web interface, so this will mangle any emails that you send. You can however -use any IMAP email client to connect to the google imap server, and forward -the emails through that. Just make sure to disable line wrapping in that -email client. Alternatively, use "git send-email" instead. +use "git send-email" and send your patches through the GMail SMTP server, or +use any IMAP email client to connect to the google IMAP server and forward +the emails through that. + +To use "git send-email" and send your patches through the GMail SMTP server, +edit ~/.gitconfig to specify your account settings: + +[sendemail] + smtpencryption = tls + smtpserver = smtp.gmail.com + smtpuser = user@gmail.com + smtppass = p4ssw0rd + smtpserverport = 587 + +Once your commits are ready to be sent to the mailing list, run the +following commands: -Submitting properly formatted patches via Gmail is simple now that -IMAP support is available. First, edit your ~/.gitconfig to specify your + $ git format-patch --cover-letter -M origin/master -o outgoing/ + $ edit outgoing/0000-* + $ git send-email outgoing/* + +To submit using the IMAP interface, first, edit your ~/.gitconfig to specify your account settings: [imap] @@ -538,14 +600,11 @@ account settings: You might need to instead use: folder = "[Google Mail]/Drafts" if you get an error that the "Folder doesn't exist". -Next, ensure that your Gmail settings are correct. In "Settings" the -"Use Unicode (UTF-8) encoding for outgoing messages" should be checked. - -Once your commits are ready to send to the mailing list, run the following -command to send the patch emails to your Gmail Drafts folder. - - $ git format-patch -M --stdout origin/master | git imap-send +Once your commits are ready to be sent to the mailing list, run the +following commands: -Go to your Gmail account, open the Drafts folder, find the patch email, fill -in the To: and CC: fields and send away! + $ git format-patch --cover-letter -M --stdout origin/master | git imap-send +Just make sure to disable line wrapping in the email client (GMail web +interface will line wrap no matter what, so you need to use a real +IMAP client). |