On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:06:09 +0200
Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The problem with git-commit is who's repo to add the hook to. I did
> > attempt to do this by picking up each of linus' main releases and then
> > using the git blame engine to attribute each "failure" to a particular
> > commit. The plan then would be to send a nasty-gram to the committer
> > about violations there-in.
Wouldn't it be easier to pass each commit through checkpatch and
email the committer if there is a problem? Each commit can be viewed
as a standalone patch afterall; what does blame add?
> The question is, whether we can convince the git developers to integrate
> it. When a commit happens and checkpatch.pl is in scripts/, then run the
> patch through it before doing the actual commit.
Definitely the way to go. I'm pretty sure the Git guys would agree to
distribute checkpatch.pl along with the existing pre-commit hook. So
at least enabling checkpatch would be trivial for those convinced to
use it.
Sean
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
