Re: [PATCH 1/2] SubmittingPatches: extend release-notes experiment to topic names

> > diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > index 86ca7f6a78a..f48688e3700 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > @@ -579,14 +579,19 @@ line via `git format-patch --notes`.
> >  [[the-topic-summary]]
> >  *This is EXPERIMENTAL*.
> >
> > -When sending a topic, you can propose a one-paragraph summary that
> > -should appear in the "What's cooking" report when it is picked up to
> > -explain the topic.  If you choose to do so, please write a 2-5 line
> > -paragraph that will fit well in our release notes (see many bulleted
> > -entries in the Documentation/RelNotes/* files for examples), and make
> > -it the first paragraph of the cover letter.  For a single-patch
> > -series, use the space between the three-dash line and the diffstat, as
> > -described earlier.
> > +When sending a topic, you can optionally propose a topic name and/or a
> > +one-paragraph summary that should appear in the "What's cooking"
> > +report when it is picked up to explain the topic.  If you choose to do
> > +so, please write a 2-5 line paragraph that will fit well in our
> > +release notes (see many bulleted entries in the
> > +Documentation/RelNotes/* files for examples), and make it the first
> > +(or second, if including a suggested topic name) paragraph of the
> > +cover letter.  If suggesting a topic name, use the format
> > +"XX/your-topic-name", where "XX" is a stand-in for the primary
> > +author's initials, and "your-topic-name" is a brief, dash-delimited
>
> Is there a precedent for “primary” author? Why not just “author”?
>
> This seems to be referring to the fact that patches might have
> co-authors (trailers) and similar, or that it could be sent from someone
> else but the author, but I don’t think this adjective makes it clear
> that the topic name should stick to the author (in the Git model’s
> sense) name only.

> But it was noted[1] that the-topic-summary doesn’t seem to have been
> used much. That’s not surprising given that the instruction makes
> the-topic-summary blend in with the rest of the cover letter and doesn’t
> signal that the author intends for the first paragraph to be used as
> such. This patch shares the same problem.