From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 06:50:58 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] format-patch: Add --rfc for the common case of [RFC PATCH]
Message-ID: <CA+P7+xoQSV99i0ntsw8P+p3K21FGCi9kkhqTq7tC3rSCMcLL5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160920013704.7hk2creytmfrla6h@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 04:40:22PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
>> >   - there are a non-trivial number of patches for other projects (JGIT,
>> >     EGIT, StGit, etc). This is somewhat unique to git, where we discuss
>> >     a lot of related projects on the list. But I wonder if other
>> >     projects would use subsystems in a similar way (though I guess for
>> >     the kernel, there are separate subsystems lists, so the "to" or "cc"
>> >     header becomes the more interesting tag).
>>
>> The kernel mostly uses "[PATCH] subsystem: ...".  Occasionally I see
>> "[PATCH somegitrepo ...] ..." when it's necessary to explicitly say
>> whose git repo the patch needs to go through, but that's pretty rare.
>
> We do both. "foo: blah" is for subsystem "foo" of Git itself, but
> all-caps "JGIT PATCH" is "this is not even for Git". I don't know that
> the kernel really has an equivalent.
>
> -Peff

[net] and [net-next] are for the *tree* not the subsystem of the tree.

net: also means the networking subsystem, but it's different you might
have a new feature and say

[net-next PATCH v2] net: my awesome new feature.

Thanks,
Jake