Re: [PATCH v5 00/11] doc: interpret-trailers: explain key format
Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.git |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ben Knoble <[email protected]> writes: >> § Link to v4 >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/git/[email protected]/ >> >> [01/11] doc: interpret-trailers: stop fixating on RFC 822 >> [02/11] doc: interpret-trailers: replace “lines” with “metadata” >> [03/11] doc: interpret-trailers: use “metadata” in Name as well >> [04/11] doc: interpret-trailers: not just for commit messages >> [05/11] doc: interpret-trailers: explain the format after the intro >> [06/11] doc: interpret-trailers: explain key format >> [07/11] doc: interpret-trailers: add key format example >> [08/11] doc: interpret-trailers: join new-trailers again >> [09/11] doc: interpret-trailers: commit to “trailer block” term >> [10/11] doc: interpret-trailers: rewrite new-trailers paragraphs >> [11/11] doc: interpret-trailers: document comment line treatment [...] >> @@ Commit message >> >> Comment lines have always been ignored but this is not documented. >> >> - The primary motivation here is to reasonably complete in the >> + The primary motivation here is to be reasonably complete in the >> documentation of how trailers are parsed; this is after all the only >> documentation page that documents this format. However, and going beyond >> that point, we could imagine that someone would want to use this format >> >> base-commit: 5361983c075154725be47b65cca9a2421789e410 >> -- >> 2.54.0.22.g9e26862b904 > > I’m trivially satisfied with the range-diff (note again I’ve reviewed primarily the end result, not the per-commit history). Heh, that is like saying it is better with "be" than without ;-). I think the topic was already in pretty good shape by 'v4'. Shall we declare victory and mark the topic for 'next'? Thanks.